Trading Standards



Trading Standards

Service Base Line/Initial Challenge

Description of Current Service – Baseline

|Who provides the service? |

|The service is provided by Stockton Council and forms part of the Community Protection Division of the Development and Neighbourhood Services |

|Directorate |

|History how service was formed and why it exists |

|The service was formed in 1996 when Stockton became a Unitary authority. There is a statutory responsibility for the authority to provide the |

|service. The service was last restructured in 2002. |

|How is the service provided |

|Service Structure |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

| |

|The service employs 9.5 FTE Trading Standards staff (Manager also has responsibility for Licensing), 3 FTE Consumer Advice staff, and shares a |

|team of 5.5 FTE admin staff with the Licensing function (also providing first point of reception for Environmental Health). NB 0.5 FTE post of |

|Enforcement Officer due to cease at August 2010. |

| |

|Duties are carried out in a number of ways including: |

|Consumer Advice Centre in the Central Library |

|Business Advice provided free of charge |

|Routine Inspections using a risk based system |

|Intelligence led enforcement – following complaints and also proactively target rogue traders |

|Special enforcement projects targeting particular illegal trade practices |

|Consumer education talks to community groups |

|Joint Working including ‘No Cold Calling Zones’ and Good Garage Scheme |

| |

|The service works in partnership to deliver Metrology services to industry, with Middlesbrough as lead authority. This partnership has been the |

|subject of 3 value for money reviews since its inception in 1996 |

| |

|The North East Trading Standards Association (a partnership of the 12 Trading Standards Services in the GONE region) have also been awarded |

|central government funding to run regional services (at no direct cost to SBC) including Consumer Direct, Scambusters team, Illegal Money Lending |

|team and some work on Tobacco Enforcement. The Trading Standards & Licensing Manager sits on the Governance Board for all of these teams. |

|What influences impact on the service( political social economical, technological) |

|All of these factors can impact on service provision in some way:- |

| |

|The political climate can impact on the quantity and type of legislation at both a national and European level. |

| |

|Social factors such as an aging population, can influence service provision with older adults more likely to be targeted by door step criminals. |

| |

|The state of the economy obviously influences trading conditions and the current recession may result in more companies cutting corners to reduce |

|costs, thereby failing to meet their statutory obligations. Also, the ‘informal economy’ tends to flourish during a recession and this in turn |

|drives down investment and slows the recovery. All of this adds to the work of the service. |

| |

|Technological advances also impact on service delivery. For example the increasing use of the internet as a purchase medium affects the number |

|and type of complaints dealt with by the service. Officers need updated skills and knowledge to deal with new technology, whilst for the criminal|

|it can provide new opportunities to break the law. This can be seen in the technological advances made by the product counterfeiter. |

| |

|How does the service perform |

|CIPFA Benchmarking |

| |

|Each year as part of our service planning process a desk top benchmarking exercise of the data submitted as part of the Chartered Institute of |

|Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) return is carried out. This return includes trading standards data on expenditure, staffing, levels of |

|enforcement work, prosecution and formal cautions. Data for 2005 – 2007 is shown in the following charts. |

| |

|The Nearest Neighbour Model on the Institute of Public Finance’s website has been used to identify similar unitary authorities in respect of |

|population density and profile, staffing levels and net cost. From our 15 nearest neighbours, the nearest 3 plus Redcar & Cleveland and |

|Darlington were chosen. Comparison with the unitary authority average (UAA) has also been made. |

| |

|It can be demonstrated that the service provides above average performance at below average cost. |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

|[pic] |

|[pic] |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

|National Performance Statistics |

| |

|[pic] |

|[pic] |

| |

|Local Statistics |

|[pic] |

|Performance Indicators for this service are contained in the Community Safety Plan, the New National Indicator Set, Community Protection Service |

|Delivery Plan, and the Trading Standards and Licensing Delivery Plan. These are all monitored on a quarterly basis. |

| |

|Sickness levels at Q3 of 2008-09 are 3.6 days per FTE against a Council average of 7.77 days. |

| |

|Trading Standards feed into two National Indicators: |

| |

|NI 182 – Satisfaction with the Regulation Services (this is joint and covers all the regulation services) For 2008-09 this was 70% |

| |

|NI 183 – Impact of local authority trading standards services on the fair trading environment |

|For 2008-09 this was 2.46% |

| |

|All Service Improvement Plan targets for 2008-09 were achieved. |

| |

|Strong performances included: |

| |

|Increase Test Purchase Attempts year on year |

| |

|From a baseline of 59 in 2006-07, during 2008-09, 110 test purchases were completed, and 11 positive sales were made. |

| |

|Up until 2007-08, Trading Standards Service reported into one BVPI: |

| |

|‘BVPI 166b – Score against a checklist for best practice for : Trading Standards’ |

| |

|Performance for this indicator was 100% placing the service in the All England top quartile. |

| |

|What does inspection tell us about this service |

|Subject to Peer Review process in 2006/07, leading to Action Plan, now implemented. The final report commented, “Overall, the peer review team |

|would like to congratulate the Service for the way in which it has carried out the self assessment process, and we are as confident as they are |

|that it will result in improving further what is already an excellent Service”. |

| |

|(The Self Assessment report and Improvement Plan are available on request and have been placed in the Members Library. The Peer Review Final |

|Report can be found at Appendix 1) |

| |

| |

|Joint Metrology Service reviewed and restructured in 2007. This restructure means that it now focuses on activities of direct benefit to the |

|partner authorities, and has reduced its commercial operations that were increasingly financially unsustainable (tanker/bulk and other accredited |

|calibration, and bulk fuel training courses). 7 FTE remain, and 4 FTE posts were lost as part of the process. |

| |

|(The review report is available on request and has also been placed in the Members Library.) |

| |

| |

|CLS Specialist Advice Quality Mark – held October 2005 to date. Final audit report commented, “The Organisation have continued to demonstrate a |

|high level of compliance against the requirements of the Specialist Quality Mark”. Stockton’s Consumer Advice Centre is one of only 3 local |

|authority consumer advice providers in the country to hold the Specialist Quality Mark. |

| |

|(The final report is available on request and has also been placed in the Members Library) |

| |

| |

|Customer First Stage 2 awarded October 2008 - a number of elements stood out during the assessment and areas of best practice were identified. |

|Peer review process, risk assessments, benchmarking, team meetings, campaigns (eg. No Cold Calling Zones), and web content were praised. Further |

|improvement was suggested to the information provided in reception area, and development of Equality Impact Assessments. |

| |

|(The final report is available on request and can be found in the Members Library.) |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|What resources are used |

|2009/10 Budget – Trading Standards |

| |

|Expenditure £532,000 |

|Income (£6,000) |

|Net Expenditure £526,000 |

| |

|2009/10 Budget – Metrology Lab |

| |

|Expenditure £102,000 |

|Income £0 |

|Net Expenditure £102,000 |

|What assets are used to deliver the current service |

|All SBC staff currently based in 16 Church Road, except for Consumer Advice Service currently located at Stockton Central Library – may re-locate.|

| |

| |

|No vehicles – some specialist equipment. |

| |

|Joint Metrology currently located at Cannon Park, Middlesbrough – major investment in specialist equipment. Possibility of income from any |

|re-location (after allocation for re-provision) |

|Are there any limitations or barriers affecting the delivery of the service |

| |

|If the service is outsourced or provided by a third party, how are service standards monitored |

|First tier consumer advice (over the telephone) is handled by Consumer Direct, which consists of regional call centres funded by central |

|government. All follow up work is referred to the local consumer advice centres in line with a formal referral protocol. The actual advice |

|given by Consumer Direct is monitored via a secure web link and a feedback system is in place so that Stockton’s Advisors can comment on any of |

|the advice given to Stockton residents by Consumer Direct. |

| |

|Other government funded organisations that carry out Trading Standards work across the north east region are the Scambusters Team and the Illegal |

|Money Lending Team. These organisations will take on projects and cases that extend over two or more local authority boundaries within the north |

|east region. |

| |

|The Trading Standards & Licensing Manager sits on the governance board of all three of these organisations. This allows for control over day to |

|day operations and performance. However as all of these organisations are funded by central government, they are also subject to stringent |

|central government monitoring procedures. |

| |

|Tees Valley Measurement, is the joint metrology centre operated in partnership with Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland and Hartlepool councils. |

|Middlesbrough acts as lead authority and so the centre is subject to Middlesbrough Council’s organisational and budgetary procedures. A Metrology|

|Joint Liaison Group consisting of chief officers from each participating authority meets regularly to discuss and review operational and budgetary|

|issues. |

Description of Current Service – Challenge

|Could the service be provided through a different mechanism |

|There is no private or voluntary sector market. |

| |

Customer Baseline – Baseline

|Who are the customers what are their needs now |

|In principle the services are available to all sections of the community, the legislation covers purchases made from the cradle to the grave, and |

|almost every purchase made/service provided on a day to day basis is subject to controls introduced by trading standards legislation. |

| |

|The Trading Standards Service does not only protect the consumer, a major role is to assist the reputable trader and ensure an equitable market |

|place. |

| |

|How are service users consulted and how do their views shape delivery |

|The Service carries out an annual feedback and satisfaction surveys for both consumers and local businesses. In addition specific consultation |

|exercises are carried out from time to time – see link below for exercise carried out with businesses in 2004. This resulted in the service |

|launching a ‘Good Garage’ scheme. The results can be found at Appendix 2. |

| |

| |

|Consumers may be consulted on specific projects e.g. the views of consumers are sought in the setting up of ‘No Cold Calling Zones’. This is done|

|via letter and residents meetings. An example of consultation information sent out recently with regard to the possible setting up of a zone in |

|Billingham, is available on request and has been placed in the Members Library. |

| |

| |

|As part of the Specialist Quality Mark procedures at the Consumer Advice Centre feedback forms are sent out in all instances where casework has |

|been carried out by the Advisors. The feedback is recorded on an excel spreadsheet (2008/09 spreadsheet attached). This feedback and indeed |

|complaints about service are used to shape service delivery e.g. following a complaint about service, Advisors are now instructed to write to |

|consumer after one-off casework where nothing further is heard from the consumer, to enquire whether the matter has been resolved to their |

|satisfaction and whether any further help is required. |

| |

|(Copies of the spreadsheet are available on request, and one has been placed in the Members Library.) |

| |

|How satisfied are the customers |

|Customers continue to be very satisfied with service provision. Over the last few years consumer and business satisfaction has been measured as |

|part of the National Performance Framework on Trading Standards and the results are summarised in graph form below. |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

| |

|Over this period Stockton’s consumer satisfaction has consistently been within the top 5 best performers throughout the whole of the country. |

|Indeed the figure remained exceptionally high for 2008/09 at 97.6%. Business satisfaction has also been high, with levels up to 90%, well above |

|the government’s upper threshold target of 75%. |

|How do you communicate with your users |

|Communication with service users is carried out through the normal channels. The Consumer Advice Centre located in the central library in |

|Stockton, operates an open door policy without appointment, where consumers can drop in for immediate face to face advice. |

| |

|The service does have its own designated website from which complaints and comments can be made - trading.standards@.uk/stockton |

|How are these services promoted / marketed |

|The service regularly issues press releases to advise residents of particular areas of concern or interesting areas of work that have been carried|

|out. Articles have also been placed in Stockton News. |

| |

|Proactive consumer education work is undertaken as a means of raising awareness of consumer rights issues and also promoting the service itself. |

|This includes talks to local community groups and targeted leaflets and information material. |

| |

|The service also has its own designated website .uk/stockton |

| |

| |

| |

|What do Viewpoint Surveys/ internal audit reports tell us about the service? |

|Viewpoint Survey in September 2004: |

|Unsafe goods, age restricted product sales, and misleading prices were ranked as most important issues. |

|Trading Standards activities were ranked in following order of importance: Investigation of Trading Malpractice (most important), Routine |

|Inspection of Trade Premises, Provision of Advice and Information to Consumers, Provision of Advice and Information to Business. |

| |

|Viewpoint Survey in June 04 surveyed responses to the new website (website created following previous survey highlighted the need): |

|55% said that the site contained useful information (30% answered ‘don’t know’) |

|56% said they would use it in future (30% answered ‘don’t know’) |

|The average rating for the website out of 10 was 6.4% |

| |

|Viewpoint survey in Nov 06 asked about the service in general: |

|72% were aware that SBC had its own Trading Standards service |

|Respondents thought home delivered leaflets were the best method of raising profile of the service |

|If respondents had problems with faulty goods/service, most people would contact the ‘trader’, followed by ‘Stockton’s Consumer Advice’, followed |

|by ‘Citizen’s Advice’. |

|When asked to rank areas of work in terms of importance, ‘investigation of malpractice’ was seen as most important, closely followed by ‘provision|

|of advice to customers’, ‘routine inspections to trade premises’, and then ‘provision of advice to businesses’ |

|In terms of consumer protection issues, ‘safety of goods’, sale of age restricted products’ and ‘inaccurately described food’ were seen as most |

|important. |

| |

|(Full copies of the Viewpoint results are available on request and copies have been placed in Members Library.) |

| |

|Internal audit are due to carry out a full review of service provision in the Autumn of this year. |

| |

|As lead authority Middlesbrough Council have carried out a recent internal audit at Tees Valley Measurement, the joint metrology centre operated |

|in partnership with the other Teesside authorities. The report concluded, “In our opinion substantial assurance is placed on the adequacy, |

|efficiency and effectiveness of management controls”. |

| |

|(The full report is available on request, and has been placed in the Members Library.) |

| |

Customer – Challenge

|Are there customers who could use the service but don’t |

|We have not undertaken an unmet demand survey as resources are not currently available to expand the service. |

|Are there customers using the service who shouldn’t be |

|No |

|Who are the customers of the future and what are their needs |

|Fluctuations in the state of the economy are more significant than demographic change. The increase in the number of elderly living independently|

|may tend, if unchallenged, to lead to an increase in ‘doorstep crime’. |

|What is likely to impact on demand for these services in the future |

| |

|What do complaints/ compliments tell you about these services |

|The service receives a large number of compliments each year from satisfied customers and very few complaints by comparison. This suggests that |

|the vast majority of service users are extremely satisfied with the level of service provided as reflected by the high levels of satisfaction |

|exhibited in the ‘How Satisfied are the Customers’ section. |

| |

|2008-09 |

| |

|12 complaints 172 commendations |

| |

|2007-08 |

| |

|8 complaints 122 commendations |

| |

| |

|(The full breakdown of complaints and commendations has been placed in the Members Library, and copies are available on request.) |

Aims & Objectives – Baseline

|Is the service required by statute |

|Below is a list of the legislation that Trading Standards have a responsibility to enforce: |

| |

|Accommodation Agencies Act 1953 |

|Administration of Justice Act 1970 |

|Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1968 |

|Agriculture Act 1970 |

|Agriculture Produce (Grading and Marking) Act 1928 |

|Business Names Act 1985 |

|Cancer Act 1939 |

|Children and Young Persons (Protection From Tobacco) Act 1991 |

|Children and Young Persons Act 1933 |

|Companies Act 1985 and 2006 |

|Consumer Credit Act 1974 |

|Consumer Protection Act 1987 |

|Control of Pollution Act 1974 |

|Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1956 - 1988 |

|County of Cleveland Act 1987 |

|Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 |

|Criminal Attempts Act 1981 |

|Criminal Justice Act 1988 |

|Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 |

|Development of Tourism Act 1969 |

|Education Reform Act 1988 |

|Energy Act 1976 |

|Energy Conservation Act 1981 |

|Estate Agents Act 1979 |

|European Communities Act 1972 |

|Explosives Acts 1875 and 1923 |

|Fair Trading Act 1973 |

|Farm and Garden Chemicals Act 1967 |

|Food and Environmental Protection Act 1985 |

|Food Safety Act 1990 |

|Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 |

|Fraud Act 2006 |

|Hallmarking Act 1973 |

|Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 |

|Insurance Brokers (Registration) Act 1977 |

|Insurance Brokers Act 1985 |

|Insurance Companies Act 1982 |

|Licensing Act 1964 and 2003 |

|Magistrates Courts Act 1980 |

|Malicious Communications Act 1988 |

|Medicines Act 1968 |

|Mock Auctions Act 1961 |

|Motor Cycle Noises Act 1987 |

|Motor Vehicles (Safety Equipment for Children) Act 1991 |

|Opticians Act 1989 |

|Poisons Act 1972 |

|Prices Act 1974 |

|Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 |

|Road Traffic (Foreign Vehicles) Act 1972 |

|Road Traffic Acts 1988 and 1991 |

|Solicitors Act 1974 |

|Telecommunications Act 1984 |

|Theft Acts 1968 and 1978 |

|Timeshare Act 1992 |

|Trade Descriptions Act 1968 and 1972 |

|Trade Marks Act 1938 and 1994 |

|Trading Representations (Disabled Persons) Acts 1958 and 1972 |

|Trading Stamps Act 1964 |

|Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971 and 1975 |

|Video Recordings Act 1984 |

|Weights and Measures Acts 1976 & 1985 |

| |

|Together with 100’s of European Directives and 1000’s of Regulations and Orders |

|Is there a statutory level of service |

|There is no statutory level of service agreed, however until this year there has been a requirement to show levels of compliance within a National|

|Performance Framework and there are two National Indicators that measure the performance of this service directly. The work of the service also |

|contributes towards a number of other National indicator targets. |

| |

|A number of Government Agencies have statutory powers enabling them to step in and manage/deliver the service if they consider the current service|

|provided is inadequate. |

|Is the service responsive or proactive or a mixture |

|The service is a mixture of both proactive and reactive |

|Is the service needed |

|Yes |

| |

|The Consumer Advice Centre is not a statutory obligation. This service could be reduced or ceased, however it is well received by users, and cost|

|effective in terms of costs versus redress secured for customers. |

|What would happen if the service was not provided either in whole or part |

|Local consumers would be left at the mercy of con men and bogus businesses. This is particularly concerning given that the most vulnerable in our|

|society e.g. the elderly, are the most susceptible to unfair trading practices. |

| |

|The local economy would also suffer, in that the ‘informal economy’ would flourish, adversely affecting legitimate businesses, driving down |

|innovation and investment. |

| |

|If Advice Centre was discontinued, it is estimated that 2 officers would be needed to deal with the enquiries in relation to potential criminal |

|enquiries (these are currently ‘filtered’ by the Advice Centre). |

|How would the service react to new pressures/what capacity would be required to deal with additional / new demands |

|The service has an excellent reputation for prioritising service delivery to meet the demands of its stakeholders, however, current resources |

|severely limit any further re. prioratisation. |

Aims & Objectives – Challenge

|Who provides a similar service to this using a different delivery mechanism e.g. external partnerships, shared services etc |

|West Yorkshire – collection of district councils joining together to deliver the service under the auspices of a joint committee. |

| |

|South Yorkshire, Tyne and Wear and “Cleveland” authorities all provide joint Metrology Services with the other authorities in their region. |

Relevance/Context – Baseline/Challenge

|How does the service fit with the overall aims of the Council |

|The key aims of the Trading Standards & Licensing Service are to:- |

| |

|Create informed confident consumers |

| |

|Create informed successful businesses |

| |

|Ensure a safe and fair trading environment |

| |

|Only in a safe and fair trading environment, which protects both consumers and reputable businesses, can the local economy succeed and flourish. |

| |

|To meet these aims the service has the following 10 priorities: |

| |

|To empower consumers by providing high quality advice and information. |

| |

|To prevent people being the victim of commercial crime in their own home. |

| |

|To ensure fair competition through goods and services being safe, correctly described, priced and measured. |

| |

|To ensure quality food and feed standards for healthier communities. |

| |

|To promote good business practice and help reputable businesses to flourish. |

| |

|To disrupt traders operating in the informal economy. |

| |

|To prevent harm to residents from the effects of tobacco and alcohol. |

| |

|To ensure the implementation of a fair, transparent and effective gambling regime. |

| |

|To reduce crime and disorder in licensed premises and vehicles to help promote a safe and diverse night time economy. |

| |

|To develop, modernise and continually improve service provision. |

| |

|How does the service contribute to key policy areas |

| |

|The service contributes to key community, corporate and local objectives in a number of differing ways as demonstrated below:- |

|Community Objectives |

| |

|The Sustainable Community Strategy 2008 – 2021, produced by the local strategic partnership Stockton Renaissance, a key partnership with |

|representatives from the public, private, community and voluntary sectors, sets out a vision of economic renaissance, enhanced well being, |

|achievement and quality of place to be delivered by focusing on five core improvement and three supporting themes. |

| |

|The Trading Standards and Licensing Service have an important role to play in helping to meet these themes: |

| |

|Core Improvement Theme |

|Areas of Trading Standards and Licensing Work that Link to the Improvement Theme |

| |

| |

|Economic Regeneration and Transport |

| |

|Active targeting of rogue traders and trading malpractice |

|Work to disrupt the informal ‘black’ economy |

|Tackling product counterfeiting |

|Enforcement of fair trading legislation |

|Advice, assistance and practical help to local businesses |

|Risk based, comprehensive inspection of businesses |

|Provision of a wide-ranging calibration service |

|Operation of a Teesside wide “Good Garage Scheme” |

|Licensing of hackney carriage and private hire vehicles |

| |

| |

|Environment and Housing |

|Rules on energy labelling for informed choice |

|Testing the accuracy of ‘green’ claims |

|Controls on construction products, hazardous substances and packaging requirements |

|Fertilisers and pesticides enforcement and sampling |

|Monitoring the provision of Home Information Packs, Energy Performance Certificates and Display Energy Certificates |

|Dealing with Estate Agents and property misdescriptions |

| |

| |

|Safer Communities |

|Ensuring the safety of all consumer goods |

|Help in tackling anti-social behaviour caused by the under age sale of alcohol and fireworks |

|Tackling illegal money lending |

|Dealing with doorstep crime |

|Road traffic overloading and unroadworthy vehicles |

|Licensing of explosives and poisons |

| |

| |

|Children and Young People |

|Under age sales enforcement |

|Promoting healthy eating and nutritional standards |

|Sampling of school meals |

| |

| |

|Healthier Communities and Adults |

|Smoke Free Stockton initiative |

|Think B4 U Drink campaign |

|Food standards work, labelling, composition and sampling |

|Promoting healthy eating and nutritional standards |

|Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy |

|Controls on the advertising and labelling of tobacco products |

|Animal feed enforcement and sampling |

|Licensing of skin piercing and animal welfare establishments |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Supporting Theme |

|Areas of Trading Standards and Licensing Work that Link to the Supporting Theme |

| |

| |

|Stronger Communities |

|Promotion of a fair, safe and equitable market place |

|Consumer advice provision |

|Consumer education initiatives |

| |

| |

|Older Adults |

|Creation of No Cold Calling Zones |

|Stockton Doorstoppers Initiative |

| |

| |

|Arts, Leisure and Culture |

|Licensing of public entertainment, late night refreshment and alcohol sales |

|Work to ensure a fair and transparent gambling regime |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Key Organisational Priorities |

| |

|The Council Plan forms a business plan for achieving the Council’s contribution to core and supporting themes within the Sustainable Community |

|Strategy. It sets out the overall vision and ambitions of the Council, describes progress, and charts the way ahead with a series of specific |

|objectives and targets. It also sets out key priorities aimed at developing the Council and ensuring organisational and operational effectiveness. |

| |

| |

|The work of the Trading Standards and Licensing Service links to these organisational priorities in a number of ways: |

| |

|Key Organisational Priority |

|Areas of Trading Standards and Licensing Work that Link to the Priority |

| |

| |

|Effective Performance and Resource Management |

|Specialist Quality Mark for Consumer Advice Centre |

|Internal quality management procedures |

|Monitoring performance levels internally and within the corporate performance monitoring framework |

|All CPA indicators above the upper threshold level |

|Very positive peer review of the Service carried out in February 2007 |

|Internal self assessment of Licensing Section carried out in January 2008 with development of related improvement plan |

|Monthly budget monitoring |

|Active member of North East Trading Standards Association |

|Partnership working in areas of crime prevention and health and safety promotion |

|Introduction of Teesside wide Good Garage Scheme |

|Links to regional Scambusters Team |

|Setting up of regional Illegal Money Lending Team |

|Joint working arrangements with Consumer Direct |

|Formal joint agreement for the Metrology Centre (Tees Valley Measurement) |

| |

| |

|People Development and Learning |

|Corporate and professional competency frameworks |

|Commitment to train staff and update skills and knowledge |

|Two officers currently working towards the Trading Standards professional qualification |

|Positive results from recent staff survey |

|Participation in Stockton’s Management Development Programme |

| |

| |

|Focusing on Residents and Customers |

|Customer First Programme – the Service achieved stage 2 accreditation in October 2008 and is now committed to working towards Customer Service |

|Excellence Standard |

|Annual programme of consultation with consumers and businesses |

|Ongoing satisfaction surveys |

|Use of the Viewpoint panel |

|Creation of No Cold Calling Zones |

| |

| |

| |

|Local Objectives |

| |

|Local objectives are designed to target issues which generate high levels of local concern or have the potential to cause significant harm within |

|the Borough: |

| |

|Local Objective |

|Areas of Trading Standards and Licensing Work that Link to this Objective |

| |

| |

|Respond to resident’s concerns and fears of crime and anti-social behaviour |

|Control on the supply of products that may influence the incidence of anti-social behaviour, especially the sale of alcohol and fireworks to |

|children |

|Links to Safer Stockton Partnership |

|Complaints investigation |

|Intelligence led enforcement |

|Work to prevent people from becoming victims of commercial crime in their own home |

|No Cold Calling Zones |

|Stockton Doorstoppers initiative |

| |

| |

|Improve the public health of the Borough |

|Controls on the advertising and labelling of tobacco products |

|Work to prevent the sale of tobacco, solvents and butane gas to children |

|Links to Smoke Free North East & Stockton Smoke Free Alliance |

|Think B4 U Drink campaign as part of the Alcohol Reduction Strategy |

|Enforcement of smoke free legislation |

|Healthy Catering Partnership |

| |

| |

| |

|Promote a fair, safe and equitable market place, providing protection for consumers |

| |

|All areas of Trading Standards and Licensing work contribute to this key local objective |

| |

| |

|What policies, plans and strategies impact on the service e.g. statutory, policy, function , other services |

|The key government strategies which have an impact on how Trading Standards work and what is expected of them are outlined below: |

| |

|[pic] |

| |

| |

|The relationship between the Trading standards & Licensing Service and other stakeholders can be seen in the diagram below: |

|[pic] |

|Are there any political judgements / decisions involved in determining the level of service |

|Exact levels of service are not currently defined by specific political judgements or decisions. However, the recommendations of the Rogers |

|Review, to set the national enforcement priorities for local regulatory services, have been accepted in full by the government. The Review used an |

|evidence-based approach to prioritise over sixty consumer protection and environmental health policy areas. Further evaluation and analysis reduced|

|this to five national enforcement priorities, namely: |

| |

|Fair trading – including trade descriptions, trade marking, mis-descriptions and doorstep selling |

|Alcohol licensing – alcohol, entertainment and late night refreshment licensing and its enforcement |

|Air quality – including regulation of pollution from factories and homes |

|Food hygiene – hygiene of food businesses selling, distributing and manufacturing food and the safety and fitness of food on the premise |

|Health and safety - improving health in the workplace |

| |

|These national priorities clarify what matters most to central government, providing focus to the wide range of activities carried out by local |

|regulators. It is anticipated that in order to make the priorities meaningful and to help authorities determine adequate levels of activity the |

|government will work with the Local Better Regulation Office to disseminate best practice and draw up advice on minimum levels of enforcement. |

| |

|The Review also recognised that local priorities formulated in response to local needs would continue to be important and relevant. Underage sales |

|in particular were identified as an area that generated high levels of local concern. |

| |

|[pic] |

Financial/Resource Considerations – Baseline

|What are the costs of the service |

|2009/10 Budget – Trading Standards |

| |

|Expenditure £532,000 |

|Income (£6,000) |

|Net Expenditure £526,000 |

| |

|2009/10 Budget – Metrology Lab |

| |

|Expenditure £102,000 |

|Income £0 |

|Net Expenditure £102,000 |

|Capital and revenue costs |

|All costs are revenue based. |

|What is the level of 3rd party expenditure |

|Metrology Lab – joint arrangement payment of £102,000 to Middlesbrough Council to cover all staffing and running cost of the facility. |

| |

|Trading Standards – No third party expenditure. Majority of the expenditure within this service is salary based. (2009/10 - £461,000) |

|What contracts or other arrangements are in place (spend analysis) |

|Metrology Lab – Joint agreement in place between Middlesbrough, Redcar, Hartlepool and Stockton. |

| |

|Trading Standards – no contracts |

|What is the Councils commitment to contracts / other arrangements |

|Metrology Lab – minimum of one year notice to be provided by all parties, assets/liabilities to be shared amongst partners (based on population |

|size). |

|Do you have any charging policies |

|Not applicable |

|How have Gershon efficiency savings impacted on the service and how were the service planning to meet future Gershon efficiency targets? |

|For the financial year 2008/09 Council agreed to limit the annual increases in the services Resource Allocation (RA) to 2%, which was below the |

|Gershon inflation guide of  2.5% for that year. This has forced services to drive down costs to generate the desired efficiencies required to meet|

|the gap between inflation and the limit on RA.’ |

| |

|This will be and has been an annual task that is undertaken when setting estimates but at this stage it is difficult to identify specifically how |

|these targets will be achieved in future years due to the ever changing demands on the services. |

| |

|How will the current financial climate affect the service? |

|It is likely to increase demand in certain areas. The state of the economy obviously influences trading conditions and the current recession may |

|result in more companies cutting corners to reduce costs, thereby failing to meet their statutory obligations. Also, the ‘informal economy’ tends|

|to flourish during a recession with consumers having less disposable income to spend on mainstream products. All of this adds to the work of the |

|service. |

Financial/Resource Considerations – Challenge

|How can you demonstrate that the service is cost effective overall? |

|CIPFA benchmarking demonstrates that the service provides above average performance at below average cost – see section on ‘How does the service |

|perform’. |

|Do external contracts offer value for money? |

|External contracts not currently available |

Service Drivers

|What do we need to change and why? |

| |

| |

|What are the main drivers of change? |

| |

|Recession |

|Likely financial pressures on local government services, including reductions in government grants/tax revenues. |

| |

Appendix 1

PEER REVIEW OF Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council’s TRADING STANDARDS SERVICE 2007

1. Introduction

This report provides feedback on the peer review of Stockton-On-Tees Trading Standards Service, carried out on 13th and 14th February 2007. This is part of a DTI funded national programme of reviews of Trading Standards Services. The purpose of this programme is to challenge how well Services are performing and to help them identify improvements.

The peer review process has two key elements. Firstly, a self assessment carried out against nine criteria in a Trading Standards specific framework adapted from the EFQM® Excellence Model. Secondly, a follow-up peer review of that self assessment, which examines its robustness and accuracy, and identifies any further improvements and good practices.

The Service undertook its self assessment over the period October to November 2006. The output from that self assessment was a report that identified the key strengths and areas for improvement for the Service, and a draft improvement plan based on this.

This was followed by a peer review by a team of people from other Trading Standards Services from within the region, and a member of the Improvement and Development Agency’s Peer Clearing House.

Utilising a desktop review of the evidence provided by the Service, the peer review team then considered the self assessment carried out and its outputs, and came to conclusions covering the self assessment and its report; the draft improvement plan; good practices that others could learn from; and further areas for improvement.

This report contains details of the peer review process undertaken and the conclusions of the peer review team, as well as a more detailed account of the findings under each of the nine criteria of the framework.

2. Methodology

The peer review team consisted of:

Colin Howey - Senior Trading Standards Officer - Newcastle City Council

Alison Brydon - Senior Trading Standards Officer - Gateshead Council

Richard Bealing - Head of Leisure & Cultural Services at Castle Morpeth Borough Council and Review Member from the Improvement and Development Agency’s Clearing House.

A series of meetings, interviews and correspondence took place with the following staff, Member and key stakeholder.

George Garlick Chief Executive

Neil Schneider Corporate Director of Development & Neighbourhood Services

Mike Batty Head of Community Protection

Councillor Kirton Lead Cabinet Member Community Safety & Protection

Craig Willows Customer First Manager and “critical friend”

David Kitching Trading Standards Team Manager

Lorraine Wilford Self Assessment Team

Jimmy Jones Self Assessment Team

Paul Chilver Self Assessment Team

John Morley Self Assessment Team

Andrea Gledhill Self Assessment Team

John Wynn Self Assessment Team

Tanvir Hussain Self Assessment Team

Staff Focus Group Consisting of 6 non-management staff

Keith Daley Police Licensing Officer and “external stakeholder”

The peer review was carried out at the Service headquarters offices in Church Road, Stockton.

3. Summary of peer review team findings

3.1 The self assessment and the report of it

The peer review team consider that the Service allocated sufficient resources to carry out a thorough self assessment process that was challenging, accurate and valid. The evidence gathering phase of self assessment involved a wide cross-section of staff which has helped provide a realistic assessment of the Service. The evidence provided to the peer review team was presented in good time and in a user friendly format.

The self assessment process has identified a number of improvements and the self assessment team has produced a well detailed and structured plan to implement them. Mechanisms for measuring improvement, clear lines of responsibility and relevant time scales were also provided for those improvements identified.

The self assessment process produced sufficient evidence to come to accurate conclusions and, with the beneficial assistance of the “critical friend”, the report from the self assessment team raised valid issues which reflected the evidence that both the self assessment team and the peer review team identified. The peer review team found that in some areas the self assessment was particularly demanding and the Service has not shied away from being critical of themselves.

The self assessment accurately identified that the Service is proactive in determining the needs and priorities of its stakeholders. It has identified who they are; found out what they want from the Service and ensured that the services provided relate to what is considered important to stakeholders. The Service is very focused on meeting these needs.

The Service has clear values and mission and makes good efforts at communicating these with staff and customers. However it must strive to ensure that communication is timely and up to date.

The one area that was not sufficiently robustly challenged was Society Results, which are recommended to be revisited by the self assessment team.

3.2 The draft improvement plan

The draft improvement plan was consistent with the themes raised in the self assessment process and the improvement actions were considered by the peer review team to be correct.

The defined improvements appear achievable and although stringent time scales were given, the Service is confident of achieving them. The improvement plan is also timely for the writing of the latest Service Plan.

Overall, the peer review team feel that the Service has a clear and ambitious strategy for improvement that takes account of local and national priorities, which will help drive the Service to produce sustainable improvements.

3. Good practices identified

The peer review team identified the following areas which we consider to be examples of good practice that we could recommend to other Services:

• Stakeholder consultation and involvement that is clear, well focussed, comprehensive and acted upon.

• External partnership working. Staff at all levels work very well with partner organisations external to the Council, regular reviews of effectiveness are undertaken, and these are acted upon. The work with the Good Garage Scheme to bring about a motor trader approval scheme across the Teesside area was a particularly good example of partnership working and response to consultation.

• The Service has a strong commitment to training exemplified by the “grow your own” Trading Standards Officer approach. They receive support and the relevant backup is in place in terms of in-house and external training. The development of newly qualified officers is considered to be important and it was clear that project programs had been planned with a view to their career development.

• Work in the community as demonstrated by e.g. Operation Strongbow (the doorstep callers and rogue builders campaign), Operation SCARAB (relating to underage drinking) in conjunction with Cleveland Police and the Think B4U Drink education programme working with the Safer Stockton Partnership.

• The Council has subscribed to a Language Translation Service, allowing officers in the field to obtain the services of an interpreter on the spot by telephone.

• Work in the community is customer focussed as demonstrated by Community Legal Services (CLS) specialist quality mark.

• The review of complaints and investigations over 3 weeks old.

4. Further opportunities for improvement

The peer review team felt that some work needed to be done to further raise the profile of Trading Standards within the Council. Whilst there is already evidence of good informal communication this needs to be improved by a more formal linkage.

The peer review team has identified a further 3 areas for improvement to the draft improvement plan:

1. More effective consultation of non-user groups.

2. Consider incorporating “enforcement” customers into satisfaction Surveys.

3. To quantify and record social and environmental impact.

The LACORS peer review website contains many examples of good practice identified during the peer review process and the Service could consider looking at the website to identify if any other Services have been shown to be particularly effective in this area, and learning from them.

5. Detailed strengths and areas for improvement

Leadership

Strengths

• Supportive management team. Demonstrated by positive feedback from the Focus Group. Appraisals valued and professional development opportunities were excellent. “Open door” policy prevalent throughout leadership chain.

• Effective framework for delegation and control via strong line management; reviewing and monitoring mechanisms as demonstrated by “delegate and trust” ethos.

• Leaders demonstrate a clear commitment to continuous improvement by volunteering for initiatives such as peer review and encouraging and supporting staff suggestions.

• The commitment of the portfolio holder for the service is demonstrated by his involvement in accompanying officers on inspections and exercises to further his understanding of the nature of Trading Standards work.

Areas for improvement

• It has been recognised that the Trading Standards Team Manager needs to be more “visible” with the staff.

• The Service needs to increase its profile within the Council by improved communication. The Service is exploring avenues to achieve this.

Policy and strategy

Strengths

• Policy and strategy are based on the expectations of a large number of identified stakeholders. The Service Plan clearly reflects the views of those consulted in the priority surveys.

• The Service echoes the needs of the market and sector in which they operate. There is a strong focus on anti-social behaviour related themes, food safety and the needs of local businesses.

• There are some excellent partnerships with voluntary organisations such as Age Concern and enforcement agencies such as the Police (Operation Strongbow, Operation SCARAB and the Think B4U Drink education campaign).

• A good media profile is maintained by regular reporting of prosecutions, safety warnings, scam alerts and new legislation.

Areas for improvement

• There is only an ad hoc relationship in some partnership working, for example, with other enforcement agencies and business forums. There may be further scope to raise the profile of the service and the potential to gain external funding through increased partnership working and networking.

People

Strengths

• Excellent staff that are well regarded at all levels. The staff have received good customer, business and management team feedback from the satisfaction surveys and customer compliments which are reported at the monthly meetings.

• The Service builds on individuals strengths. There is a capacity for all staff to develop an interest and expertise. Again, this was demonstrated by staff at all levels, covering topics such as corporate issues; regulatory focus; process management; project management and consumer/trader talks.

• There is evidence of strong teamwork and a sense of “belonging”. Staff are happy to be flexible in helping out colleagues whilst maintaining a balanced competitive edge to performance.

• The Service is committed to the professional development of staff. Generally there are very good training opportunities, specifically evidenced by the recent qualification of 2 Trading Standards Officers from existing staff and the continued “grow your own” approach.

• The annual Service Delivery plan identifies specific officers with responsibility for individual projects. Progress against the plan is monitored at regular team meetings encouraging communication and ownership by members of the team

Areas for improvement

• None identified.

Partnerships and resources

Strengths

• There are some strong relationships with “community issues” via the work with underage sales and other anti-social behaviour related matters.

• The Service is responsive to the changing needs of the business community as demonstrated by the set up of the Good Garage Scheme.

• Demonstrates commitment to regional working e.g. joint food sampling projects, peer review, member of the North East Trading Standards Association (NETSA) and supporting regional training opportunities.

• The Service has a management information system (FLARE) adapted to provide comprehensive statistical and performance information.

• High levels of equipment and information sources are made available to staff to allow efficient service provision.

• A dedicated room and equipment for conducting interviews with potential defendants lend themselves to thorough investigations.

• Excellent partnership with the Police was identified as a particular strength. The Think B4U Drink campaign resulted in Stockton Council being formally recognised by winning the Most Responsible Local Authority in the December 2005 Responsible Drinks Retailing Awards.

Areas for improvement

• Although some good partnerships exist momentum needs to be maintained, e.g. with the Police (other than underage sales).

Processes

Strengths

• The peer review team felt that the self assessment correctly identified the key strengths with regard to the customer focussed management of processes. This includes the effective use of Investors in People (IIP), the CLS specialist quality mark and the intelligence led enforcement approach.

• It is apparent from the self assessment evidence and interviews conducted by the peer review team that process management is a major asset for improving the Service and it is clearly “ahead of the game” in this criterion. Typified by the Trading Standards Team Manager’s involvement with a number of working groups within the Council organisation.

Areas for improvement

• Increased benchmarking of services and identifying best practice with other authorities and organisations. This should become easier with the rolling out of the peer review process to all Trading Standards Authorities.

Results

Strengths

• The peer review team consider that the self assessment process provided a thorough analysis of customer results. The Service enjoys a very high level of satisfaction from consumers and traders alike, augmented by commitment to IIP and the CLS specialist quality mark.

• Staff consultation by the Service and feedback from the Focus Group show a high level of satisfaction for most “people” issues.

• The benchmarking which the service has undertaken confirms that the service compares well with similar authorities in producing good results at low cost.

Areas for improvement

• There is a need to quantify the social and environmental impact of the Service. There are clear opportunities for Trading Standards to demonstrate their value and link to the strategic key service objectives. For example the talks to schools and consumer groups.

• The Service already has systems in place for recycling office waste. By measuring, recording and monitoring those efforts the Service will be making some contribution to protecting the environment. It would also demonstrate foresight for quality marks such as the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) which are likely to be implemented in the near future.

3.6 Conclusions

Overall, the peer review team would like to congratulate the Service for the way in which it has carried out the self assessment process, and we are as confident as they are that it will result in improving further what is already an excellent Service. Some improvements were identified for the Service to carry out. The Service is now asked to:

• Improve the plan as described in paragraph 3.4 above.

The peer review team would ask you to provide a response to these issues, including an amended improvement plan, within four weeks of the date of this report. If possible we would be willing to return to the Service in one year’s time in order to discuss progress.

Finally, the peer review team wishes to extend its thanks to everyone involved in the process for their honesty, courtesy and co-operation during the process.

Signed:

Colin Howey ………………………………………………………….

Alison Brydon ………………………………………………………...

Richard Bealing ……………………………………………………………

Date: ……………….

Appendix 2 - 2004 Business Survey

A major consultation exercise was carried out in early 2004 as part of a larger project examining how the Service could improve links with the local business community. In total 110 businesses responded. The level of awareness was good with 82% of respondents being aware of the Service.

When asked what businesses wanted from Trading Standards, 41% said they wanted more advice for business; 32% wanted to meet to discuss their particular needs and 27% wanted more specialist staff.

Surprisingly when asked to rate their level of knowledge of consumer protection legislation on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being high and 1 being poor), 58% felt that their level of knowledge was 7 or higher. This finding was despite the fact that 41% said that they wanted more business advice.

Businesses were also asked what priorities they gave to Trading Standards duties and problem areas. The results were as follows:

The exercise also examined the level of interest in the proposal for a local business forum or partnership. 56% of respondents said they would be interested in a specific trader scheme. As a result of this the Service launched the Tees Valley Motor Trade Partnership ‘Good Garage Scheme’ in November 2006, in conjunction with Middlesbrough and Redcar & Cleveland Trading Standards.

-----------------------

Corporate Director

Development & Neighbourhood Services

Head of Community Protection

Trading Standards & Licensing Manager

2 x Principal Trading Standards Officers

Principal Licensing Officer

Administration Officer

3 x Trading Standards Officers

4.5 fte x Enforcement Officers

Senior Consumer Adviser

2 x Consumer Adviser

Senior Clerk

3.5 fte x Clerical Assistants

4 x Enforcement Officers

[pic]

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download