Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Origin Claims when naming products e.g. 'Russian Bread' whereas the bread is not from Russia, nor any of its ingredients

Share this

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,071 posts
  • 849 thanks
536
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 07 July 2020 - 09:59 AM

That said, they're not auditing either from what I can see... so unless they're furloughed, they should really have the time...

Getting a lot of emails from them about "business support" through the current crisis, and I know a few have certainly been busy dealing with snake oil COVID cures/preventions and some quite ludicrous 5G "protection" products :rolleyes:

Whilst a lot of retail has been shut down over the last few months, there seems to have been no shortage of charlatans and/or misguided idiots springing up with dubious businesses... 

 

Maybe you're also considered very low risk? These days I only see them if we've paid for a visit as part of the Primary Authority partnership or if they've got students/trainees and want a tame food manufacturing facility to look around - must be approaching five years since they did a "normal" inspection of the type they used to do routinely every year.



GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,791 posts
  • 721 thanks
225
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 07 July 2020 - 02:13 PM

Maybe you're also considered very low risk? These days I only see them if we've paid for a visit as part of the Primary Authority partnership or if they've got students/trainees and want a tame food manufacturing facility to look around - must be approaching five years since they did a "normal" inspection of the type they used to do routinely every year.

 

I think the thing is if you get some kind of 3rd party audit they pretty much step away.  I think it's a risk.  I know of plenty of sites that get away with murder despite being GFSI certified.



Food Police

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 50 posts
  • 9 thanks
11
Good

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Interests:Computers, Technology, Biology, Stock Market, Hunting, Fishing, Motorcycles, and of course Quality Assurance (food/beverage/nutraceutical/medical device/pharma)

Posted 10 July 2020 - 10:26 PM

Just for the uninitiated like myself, I guess this is an example of  Polski Skleps (Shops) -

 

attachicon.gif Polski Sklep.PNG

 

(Swindon)

 

So its kind of like a bodega lol that's good to know.



Ieatcookies

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 59 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 22 July 2020 - 07:31 AM

Just to update everyone. I have contacted Campden regarding the issue and response was: 

 

1. Products are not on the protected names and status (PDO/PGI status) and therefore do not need to be made to a certain specification

 

2. 

Food Information shall not be misleading as to the characteristics, identity, properties, composition, quantity, durability, country of origin or place of provenance, method of manufacture or production as in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 on Food Information to Consumers (FIC).

 

3.Article 2 (2)(o) of the Regulation EU 1169/2011 (FIC) defines customary name as ‘a  name  which  is  accepted  as  the  name  of  the  food  by  consumers  in  the  Member  State  in  which  that  food  is  sold,  without  that  name  needing  further  explanation’.

 

4. Article 26 (2)(a) of the FIC suggest that the naming the product with the provenance may mislead the consumer

 

5. The Food Information to Consumers Regulation EU No 1169/2011 (the FIC) states that they should not replace a legally compliant product name; and of course there is the general requirement in Article 7 of the mentioned Regulation that consumers must not me misled. Where a description is to be applied to a product, one should bear in mind Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers (FIC), in so much that the name of the product must be precise enough to enable consumers to know the true nature of the product and to distinguish it from foods with which they could confuse it with.

 

6. In addition to the naming requirements under the FIC, in instances such as this, the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the EU ‘General Food Law Regulations’ (Regulation (EC) NO. 178/2002), must also be considered as this covers the overall impression of the product (which would include the name), and could the term ‘chocolate fudgy brownies’ mislead the consumers into purchasing the product, thinking that it contains fudge, this is ambiguous and therefore potentially misleading.  

7. it is our business and we must be able to explain the names when challenged by the enforce officers. 



pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,071 posts
  • 849 thanks
536
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 22 July 2020 - 08:19 AM

Interesting - their conclusion was broadly the same as that of the posters in the thread, in that it "may" misled the consumer. Generally these third party services take an understandably conservative position but in a general sense their interpretation seems unsurprisingly sound.



Ieatcookies

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 59 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 27 July 2020 - 12:19 PM

hello, 

 

new question, same subject  :silly:

 

Supplier (who owns the product brand) decided he wants a product with the protected name. I have informed the customer that the name is protected, so he has decided to add style to the label. I am not entirely sure if this is allowed, as the product we made for him is not even close to the original product, but client wants. So, do we take the responsibility for the name if he owns the brand?  :hypocrite:



pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,071 posts
  • 849 thanks
536
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 27 July 2020 - 12:44 PM

Sorry, which protected name?

I thought the conclusion from Leatherhead was that "Russian Bread" isn't subject to a PDO/PGI?

If you're meaning they want to go with the "Russian Bread" name and try to dodge the (potential) provenance claim by adding "style" to it then you are discovering one of the many joys that come from packing for someone else's brand, and particularly so when they're led by marketing and don't worry about trivialities like regulations, misleading consumers etc. If I sound cynical it's because I too have had this joy :shutup:

 

The FSA doesn't appear to have updated their full Country of Origin Labelling Guidance document since 2007ish, which predates the current regulations, but nonetheless the conclusion implied by it is the same as that from the far more brief detail on their site here, with the most relevant bit quoted below: https://labellingtra...overview_1.html

To indicate authentic characteristics the packaging of a prepacked baguette, for instance, might depict the colours of the French flag, or a product's chosen name might include a geographical reference, e.g. 'Greek style yogurt', but if the origin of the products was not France or Greece respectively, then the true origin would need to be stated.

 

I think this probably brings it back towards something like my suggestion in post #4, where you (or rather, the brand owners ;) ) are adding extra clarification so consumers won't make errant inferences as to the actual origin of the product/ingredients. 



Ieatcookies

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 59 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 27 July 2020 - 03:15 PM

Sorry, which protected name?

I thought the conclusion from Leatherhead was that "Russian Bread" isn't subject to a PDO/PGI?

russian bread is our own brand created ages ago, now we have a new customer, who thought it would be great to name his own branded product (New Product Development, not yet on the market) with the protected name. 

He does not want extra clarification on the label  :yeahrite:  :doh: except going with the statement: 'style', although i think this will not be sufficient.  therefore i wonder if we as a company will take the responsibility for this or it is his product. therefore his responsibility?  :yeahrite:



pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,071 posts
  • 849 thanks
536
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 27 July 2020 - 03:53 PM

therefore i wonder if we as a company will take the responsibility for this or it is his product. therefore his responsibility?  :yeahrite:

Article 8(1) of 1169/2011:

The food business operator responsible for the food information shall be the operator under whose name or business name the food is marketed or, if that operator is not established in the Union, the importer into the Union market.

 

To me this seems fairly clear-cut that in terms of the actual labelling responsibility it is your customer as the brand owner who needs to ensure it is right - if it is recalled or Trading Standards decide it needs to be taken off sale or subject to other enforcement action then it would be your customer as the brand owner who will be on the receiving end of things.

 

But... I'd definitely get written instruction from the customer in which they tell you what they want on the label, acknowledge your advice that you do not believe it to be compliant with current regulations, and to indemnify you against any costs your business may encounter from any action taken as a result of this. I'd probably also run it by a solicitor to make sure you are contractually on solid ground, as the last thing you want to be doing is picking up costs for changing artwork or recalling product thanks to a misguided brand owner who repeatedly ignored good advice ;)



Thanked by 1 Member:

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,791 posts
  • 721 thanks
225
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 05 August 2020 - 02:09 PM

hello, 

 

new question, same subject  :silly:

 

Supplier (who owns the product brand) decided he wants a product with the protected name. I have informed the customer that the name is protected, so he has decided to add style to the label. I am not entirely sure if this is allowed, as the product we made for him is not even close to the original product, but client wants. So, do we take the responsibility for the name if he owns the brand?  :hypocrite:

 

Interesting conundrum.

 

I used to manufacture for retailer own brand so the company I worked for didn't "own" the brand nor the labelling.  Yet the mistakes they used to make on their labels...  Between me and my team we checked thousands of labels a year and now and again, one mistake they'd made got through.

 

You can bet it was seen as our fault though and cost us money.

 

I'd make sure you'd got it in writing that you'd recommended a different name.  I'd also suggest you recommend getting expert opinion of a TSO home authority if you have that arrangement set up.



Thanked by 1 Member:

Ieatcookies

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 59 posts
  • 4 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 06 August 2020 - 10:46 AM

thank you all. We will get them to approve the spec and sign the statement. 





Share this


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users