Letter: Now clock this

Richard Kimblin
Wednesday 28 July 1999 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: You are right to identify the need for trading standards departments to be adequately resourced ("New crackdown on `rip-off Britain' ", 23 July). However, in your example of car clocking and the need to create a new offence, this has long been an offence and motor traders are regularly prosecuted for supplying goods to which a false trade description has been applied, ie an incorrect odometer reading (s1 a,b Trade Descriptions Act 1968).

Enforcement of the existing law depends in part on the extent to which the prosecuting authority can recover the costs of the investigation and prosecution. The Lord Chief Justice in R v Northallerton Magistrates Court, ex p Dove (The Times, 17 June 1999) stated that "the costs ordered to be paid, should not in the ordinary way be grossly disproportionate to the fine .... It was preferable to achieve an acceptable total by reducing the sum of the costs ordered rather than reducing the fine." The justice to the defendant of the Lord Chief's overall approach is clear, but there are serious consequences which flow from it.

Offences created to protect the consumer and the environment are generally costly in terms of officers' time and resources to investigate and prosecute. If costs orders are to be restricted in preference to fines, which go to central government funds, then it follows that there will be fewer prosecutions. Alternatively, the taxpayer will pay for most of the investigation of the clocker's offending. A Fair Trading Bill should address this.

RICHARD KIMBLIN

Birmingham

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in