Agenda item

The Trading Standards Joint Management Committee is asked to note performance of the Service since its inception in April 2015 and to agree any corrective action that it feels is required.The information provided covers performance against the: 6 high level agreed indicators; delivery of the benefits anticipated in the Business Case; and in relation to the service budget.

The information provided shows that:

·         Overall performance against the 6 high level indicators is on target.

·         All savings, income and efficiencies anticipated in the Business Case are on target to be delivered. There is more work required to deliver the expected service enhancement around volunteering.

It is projected that the budget will breakeven at outturn, achieving all the savings projected in the business case for the shared service.

Declarations of interest:

None

Witnesses:

Steve Ruddy,Head of TradingStandards

Amanda Poole, AssistantHead of TradingStandards

Phil Dart, Service Director, BuckinghamshireCounty Council

Yvonne Rees,Customerand CommunitiesStrategicDirector,SurreyCounty Council

Keypointsraised during the discussion:

1.         The Assistant Head of Trading Standardsintroducedthereport which gave details of the performance of the Service since its inception in April 2015.  The information covered performance against the six high level agreed indicators, delivery of the benefits anticipated in the business case and in relation to the service budget. It was noted that:

·                    Paragraph 2 should read ‘In future years the high level PIs would be agreed by the Joint Committee at its spring meetings’;

·                 In Quarter 1 approximately £28,000 Proceeds of Crime (POCA) income had been received;

·                 The minimum income currently projected from PAPs in 15-16 was £100,000.   Latest information indicates that this is likely to rise to £140,000 before the end of the year.

2.         A Member of the Committee asked about how the service ensured that criminals couldn’t hide assets, or claim that assets were worth less than their true value, to protect them from Proceeds of Crime action. The Officer advised that a valuation process was in place and that any revaluation went to the court for agreement. A Member of the Committee asked if there was a timeline for sale of assets. The Officer explained that there was a timeline for sale of assets but the timeline was about to change from 12 months from when the order was made to 6 months. The Committee was told that if assets were released and the defendant didn’t pay, a confiscation order could be made and the defendant could go to prison. The Officer confirmed that the defendant would be responsible for the debt for the rest of their life and there were some cases where there were no assets that could be used and times when unfortunately victims did not get their money back.

3.         The Service Director referred to the Proceeds from Crime, and asked if there was the potential for the Joint Service to set up a compensation fund using money retained from other cases? The Officer explained that was possible in appropriate cases where the victim could not afford to put right any damage caused by a rogue trader.

4.         A Member of the Committee said that banks have alerted Trading Standards to of incidents of suspicious activity such as individuals withdrawing large cash sums and asked how close the relationship was between Trading Standards and bank managers in the local area. The Officer advised that various projects had previously taken place to establish links with bank managers but there was the issue of bank managers moving to a different branch. It was acknowledged that ways of reestablishing links needed to be revisited and the Committee was told that the National Trading Standards Scams team work with banks to try to develop a national approach to ensure banks recognised the problem.

5.         A Member of the Committee said that ways of better publicising/utilising staff for volunteer days was highlighted at a recent management meeting at Surrey County Council.  Increasing the number of volunteers, especially in Surrey where numbers of trading Standards volunteers was low, was a high priority for the service. The Service Director asked what happened to the extra income from PAPs as the figure reported was markedly different from expected. The Officer advised that the updated figure had only been received this week and would be reflected in future budget projections.

6.         An Advisory Member said that at a recent Community Safety Board meeting, the issue was raised that there were no national statistics that could be shared about psychoactive substances. The Officer explained that the DAAT team in Buckinghamshire had been developing statistics and work had taken place on a strategy to deal with new psychoactive substances (NPS).

7.         A Member of the Committee said the way banks reported any suspicious activity needed to be a priority.

8.         A Member of the Committee asked how the Joint Trading Standards Service would report back to Council/Cabinet i.e. a yearly report. The Officer advised that Surrey County Council had recently agreed that the 6 high level indicators would go on their performance system and that at Buckinghamshire County Council the Indicators were currently reported via the Corporate Team. It was acknowledged that the indicators were from 2014 and needed to be updated.

9.         The Service Director said that providing bank tellers with an onscreen alert of any suspicious account activity was a national issue and asked how this issue could be approached through the joint service.

RESOLVED:

TheCommittee noted the Service’s performance and considered any corrective actions it felt necessary.

Action/furtherinformationto beprovided:

The Head of Trading Standards agreed:

1.   To investigate the potential for the Joint Service to set up a compensation fund using money retained from other cases;

2.   To contact Rachel Crossley to follow up ways of better promoting volunteering.

3.   To follow up the issue of ensuring that banks reported suspicious activity to better protect customers, including scope for an onscreen alert for bank tellers.