Ability of trading standards teams to protect consumers is a postcode lottery: Rocio Concha

The reality is quite different. As Which?’s extensive freedom of information request lays bare, not all trading standards teams operate to the same level. When we asked all 187 trading standards services in England, Wales and Scotland, we found shocking disparities in staffing levels.

In places like Anglesey and Ceredigion in Wales, there are more than 15 staff per 100,000 people. In Orkney, there are almost five trading standards staff covering the islands – the equivalent of almost 21 staff per 100,000 people. Meanwhile, in several London boroughs, including Barnet, Enfield and Lambeth, there is less than one officer per 100,000 people. Stretched so thinly, the essential work they need to carry out, from intercepting fake and dangerous products to rooting out misleading food claims, is made nigh on impossible.

The consequences aren’t trivial. This postcode lottery means that unscrupulous traders can continue getting away with illegal activity, ripping people off and leaving them to face the often devastating consequences, financial and emotional.

Some services reported no criminal prosecutions in the 2023/24 financial year and 38 services told us they have had to deprioritise proactive work like routine inspections in recent years, potentially leaving space for unscrupulous business practices to go unnoticed. It’s a depressing reflection of the cuts made to spending on trading standards over the past decade, which according to the Chartered Trading Standards Institute, is estimated to be by over 50 per cent.

Clearly, the current situation is unsustainable. With businesses becoming more complex, more multinational and more online, but an enforcement model developed decades ago, action is even more pressing. So what can be done? Encouragingly for the government, which at this time of year is bombarded with pleas to allocate more money in the upcoming year’s spending review, reform of trading standards can be about making better use of resources.

Which? thinks the government should commit to a root and branch review of trading standards and in the current spending review think about how improvements can be made to get better value for money.

This needs to ensure it is easier for local trading standards services to take legal action, tailored support to those authorities that are failing to provide even basic support and an appropriate balance of resources and skills at central, regional and local levels. Underpinning that must be supported by effective intelligence-sharing and effective regulatory powers.

The motivation for a more effective consumer enforcement system shouldn’t just be in the desire to provide consumers with adequate protection from crime, dangerous products and blatant rip-offs. It would also be good for economic growth. Better enforced consumer protections help competition because people feel safer shopping around and have the confidence to spend their money. It also helps responsible businesses who sell legitimate products and train their staff not to be undercut by unscrupulous traders.

It isn’t every day that reforms come with a trio of benefits. But reforming trading standards, within the wider consumer enforcement landscape, would benefit both consumers, in the form of strengthened protections, legitimate businesses, through a levelling of the playing field, and give a boost to the government’s bid to strengthen economic growth. Ministers should grab the opportunity.