View report page

In retail shops in Ruislip-Northwood 122 labelled displays of these kinds of foods
have been examined and the descriptions found to be accurate. Because the descriptions
were correct samples were not procured. Whenever inspection raises a doubt samples
are purchased for critical examination.
During the year considerable attention has also been paid to the quality of meat
and vegetables supplied to County Council establishments including schools, old folks
homes and nurseries. In the whole county in the year under consideration there were
59 instances of inferior quality or wrong cuts of meat and three instances of poor
quality vegetables. These have in the main been dealt with by advice to the traders
rather than punitive action but one instance in which frozen beef was described as
chilled, and one where cod was supplied as haddock were dealt with by prosecution
of the offenders. A consignment of veal sent to a Ruislip School was found to be of
poor quality. When the butcher's attention was drawn to this the meat was replaced
by veal of satisfactory quality.
MERCHANDISE MARKS ACTS, 1887-1953
Inspections are carried out under the Above Acts to ensure that the requirements
of various Marking Orders relating to the indication of origin of imported foodstuffs are
correctly observed. Inspections were made at 113 premises and a total of 362 displays
of foodstuffs were examined. Generally, the requirements of the Marking Orders are
well observed and there were no occasions during the year when it was necessary to
institute proceedings for failure to mark. A number of minor infringements were dealt
with by verbal warnings to the traders concerned.
The Merchandise Marks Acts also make it an offence to apply false trade
descriptions to goods. For selling to a hospital in Ruislip-Northwood butchers' meat
of Uruguayan origin which was falsely described as "Argentine" a firm of butchers
were prosecuted, fined £10 and ordered to pay three guineas towards the costs.
THE LABELLING OF FOOD ORDER, 1953
This Order requires prepacked food to be marked with the name and address of the
packer or labeller or a registered trademark; to be marked with its common or usual
name and to bear a statement of ingredients if the food is composed of more than one
ingredient. It also controls the manner in which the presence of vitamins and minerals is
disclosed. For the purpose of ensuring a compliance with the Order 135 premises were
visited and 527 articles of food were examined.
A considerable volume of correspondence with importers and manufacturers, designed
to secure the correction of labels which infringe the requirements of the Labelling of Food
Order have been carried out during the course of the year. Types of offences dealt with in
this way included foods in respect of which there was no statement of ingredients; foods upon
which there was an incorrect statement of ingredients; claims to vitamins which were general
and not specific, in that the presence of the vitamins was claimed without a declaration of
the quantity of the vitamin present; claims that foods were "vitamin enriched" when in fact,
the quantity of vitamins present was not sufficient to justify the claim that the food was a
rich source; illegible labels; and insufficiently explicit names of foods.
29