Feed Manual of Official Controls

This chapter includes two approaches to enforcement: 

• Informal enforcement action – advice and letters to FeBO’s following interventions and investigations that may be carried out by the Authorised Officer.
• Formal enforcement action – statutory notices and reports to the Procurator Fiscal. Generally, formal enforcement action shall be carried out by FSS. However, Authorised Officers from Agents may be asked to undertake this work, in exceptional circumstances and with written agreement from FSS. The necessary requirements are laid out in this Chapter, should they be required. At all times, FSS is fully responsible and accountable for all decisions made.

If the officer considers that formal enforcement action is necessary, they should email the FDB with relevant details (FeBO, circumstances, recommended enforcement action and reasons for this course of action). The email should have the following text in the subject line: “Third party referral - enforcement action to FSS”.

The FDB will advise in writing whether FSS officers shall do this work or request that the Agent’s officer take this action. 

Reports to the Procurator Fiscal shall only be prepared by FSS.

This Chapter deals with how Authorised Officers must use the powers available to them to ensure non-compliances are rectified in an efficient and timely manner.

The Authorised Officer and FDB will agree the necessary and appropriate enforcement action which must be:

• in accordance with the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy
• consistent with Codes of Good Practice
• supported by sufficient evidence of non-compliance to justify the actions taken.

Competence for feed law functions, including enforcement, is provided to FSS by The Feed (Transfer of Functions) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Scotland Regulations 2020. These Regulations provide FSS with powers to delegate this function to qualifying third parties and the scope of the delegation is provided in the Delegated Service Level Agreement. 

Formal enforcement action must only be taken having had regard to the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policyand must be considered as part of the escalation of enforcement action in line with the hierarchy of enforcement.

The Feed (Hygiene and Enforcement) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 provide for enforcement notices and orders, detailed in this Chapter i.e.

• Feed business improvement notices (Article 17)
• Feed business emergency prohibition notices and orders (Article 22)
• Feed business prohibition orders (Article 21)
• Definition of feed (Article 25)
• Seizure of feed (Article 25)
• Suspension of registration or approval (Article 9)
• Revocation of registration or approval (Article 11)

Regulation 31 permits appropriately Authorised Officers of Competent Authorities to use the powers set out in 65 to 67, 72 and 46 of  Regulation (EU)  2017/625 on the official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed (detention, destruction, special treatment, re-dispatch and other appropriate measures and costs). Further details are at 7.22. 

The right to privacy and respect for personal property are key principles of the Human Rights Act 1998. Powers of entry, search and seizure must be fully and clearly justified before use because they may significantly interfere with the occupier’s privacy. Officers must consider if the necessary objectives can be met by less intrusive means.

Regulation 24(4) of the Feed (Hygiene and Enforcement) (Scotland) Regulations 2005 permits an Authorised Officer to take with them such other persons as they consider necessary. This would include, for example, any suitably qualified or skilled person or an expert in a particular field whose presence is needed to help accurately identify the material sought or to advise where certain evidence is most likely to be found and how it should be dealt with. These provisions do not confer on the accompanying person any of the powers of an Authorised Officer, but they do give that person the right to be on the premises during the Authorised Officer’s search, without the occupier’s permission.

Regulation 30(12) states that an officer has the right to ‘seize and detain any record which the officer has reasonable cause to believe to be a record which may be required as evidence in proceedings under specified feed law’.

In all cases Authorised Officers must:

• exercise their powers courteously and with respect for persons and property; and
• in circumstances where a warrant has been obtained and is appropriate, only use

reasonable force when this is considered necessary and proportionate to the circumstances.

In Scotland, a crime is defined by Scots Law or an offence under statute and common law. Where an AO may suspect a crime or offence has been committed, it is essential that evidence is properly gathered and preserved pending potential investigation by the Scottish Food Crime and Incidents Unit (SFCIU) or referral to another law enforcement agency. The AO must gather evidence at the time the crime/offence is discovered, as it may be impossible to gather evidence retrospectively. It is always advisable and useful to obtain corroboration and assistance from other members of the Inspection Team.

Under Scots law, before conviction of a criminal offence, there must be corroborated evidence to prove two essential facts:

 • a crime was committed, 

• it was committed by the accused 

Corroboration simply means evidence from two sources. It can be in the form of eyewitnesses, admissions or surrounding facts and circumstances, but does not require that every piece of evidence has to be spoken to by two witnesses. 

Note: Look after evidence – keep it secure. It is fundamental to proving the offence should formal action be pursued.

A fundamental rule of Scots law is that best evidence be presented to courts in relation to criminal proceedings. Whenever possible, any original items of evidence should be preserved, e.g. the original form of a document, rather than a photocopy. If the evidence is a part of a feed sample, it should be preserved by the AO (for example by freezing).

A portion of the sample should be left with the FeBO to allow them the opportunity to have it examined by an expert.

All AOs are allocated an official notebook for recording significant events and findings. The notebook is essential for recording evidence and details of incidents where detailed facts need to be recorded immediately. 

The use of the notebook is not to replace FMIS for recording day-to-day inspections, but should supplement this.

An Authorised Officer should make full use of their notebook to record factual, contemporaneous notes, including during formal sampling. Official notebooks are used to accurately record an incident and provide an account of the evidence of the AO’s own recollection. The information in the notebook will be used when noting a statement from an AO and may be referred to when giving evidence in court.

It is therefore incumbent upon AOs to make their own notes as they may not refer to notes made by others in court proceedings. Where the AO and FeBO have had a conversation regarding action to be taken to achieve compliance, it may be beneficial to ask the FeBO to sign the notes taken by the AO as an accurate account of what was agreed.

An AO should not attempt to conduct a full investigation into matters which are likely to be referred for formal investigation (see 8.5) as specific training is needed to ensure that evidence is gathered in accordance with Scottish Criminal Law. An AO may continue to gather evidence towards the FeBO achieving compliance, including the issuing of Remedial Action Notice (RAN) or other sanction, where appropriate. 

SFCIU have trained investigators, who are responsible for noting statements, questioning suspects etc. AOs should not be cautioning or interviewing suspects, or taking formal statements from potential witnesses, but should take a note of any explanations offered. AOs should otherwise confine the extent of their evidence gathering to: 

• noting observations made at the time 

• securing physical evidence such as samples, etc. 

• taking photographs where appropriate; and 

• seizing relevant documents which come into their possession

Taking photographs in approved or registered premises is a fundamental part of the evidence gathering process and should be taken using a tablet provided by FSS or the camera of an official work phone.

The AO shall inform the FeBO of the intention to take photographs to gather evidence as a matter of courtesy, however the FeBO should be reminded that it is an offence of obstruction if they attempt to prevent the AO from doing so.

The use of video to record high speed operations, operational practises, animal welfare issues etc., is recommended. Verbal comments made during recordings will require to be transcribed and admitted in evidence.

Photographs and video recordings of an incident are likely to provide a more complete record than an officer’s recollection and subsequent notes or statement. However, details should still be recorded in official notebooks to supplement this evidence, notwithstanding that digital photographs and recordings may be corrupted and lost during download or image transfer. Although all AOs have powers to take photographs for the purpose of evidence gathering, they must always seek the permission of the FeBO if they are taking photographs for any other reason.

AOs should contact the Scottish Government Legal Directorate and provide sufficient information and/or intelligence on the conditions that prevent entry onto FSS registered or approved premises to enable an application for a warrant of entry to be made to the Procurator Fiscal within the Sheriffdom where the premises is located. The Procurator Fiscal will then draft a warrant for authorisation by a Sheriff. (The Crown Office offer 24-hour coverage for emergency cases). 

Note:  The AO may be required to attend court to swear the information on oath to satisfy the Sheriff there are reasonable grounds to grant the warrant of entry.

A warrant of entry authorises the applicant (i.e. AO), accompanied by other persons considered necessary by the applicant to enter the premises on one occasion within a month of the date the warrant was granted, by force if necessary, until the purpose for which entry is required is satisfied.

An Authorised Officer should always consult with an FSS Investigator for advice prior to executing a warrant of entry.

The execution of the warrant should not be delayed unnecessarily.  FCIB requires to be consulted in advance to establish if there is any intelligence to suggest potential risk to staff from the FBO or other party associated with the premises.

On attending the premises, the AO will show the warrant to the occupier and read over the terms in full. DO NOT hand the warrant to the occupier or other party or allow them to be in a position take possession of it as it risks being destroyed. Although this would constitute an offence, a replacement may have to be applied for from the court.  It is always good practise to have the warrant contained in a thick plastic sleeve so it can still be read but protected from interference. The FBO is not entitled to receive a copy of the warrant as it is an official court document.

If an occupier refuses to allow entry onto the premises, obstructs the AO from fulfilling the terms of the warrant, or the premises are otherwise secured and unoccupied, the police should be called to assist gain entry and until the terms of the warrant are fully satisfied. 

Any obstruction to the execution of the terms of the warrant is an offence and any person doing so should be advised of this.

The AO should make contemporaneous notes on the execution of the warrant, including any obstruction encountered and findings from the inspection. 

Whilst a warrant of entry authorises use of force onto secure premises, AOs should never attempt to do so by themselves and advice should at first be sought from an FSS Investigator.

Records of enforcement action and formal decision making and any other relevant information relating to the FeBE shall be saved on FMIS or eRDM.

Failure to comply with significant statutory requirements may include: 

• a single requirement that compromises feed safety, compromises public or animal health, or prejudices the purchaser or user of the feed
• several requirements that, taken together, indicate ineffective management; and
• the requirements of a statutory Notice or Order.

The Authorised Officer must:

• in collaboration with the FDB, having regard to the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy ensure that where feed businesses fail to comply with significant statutory requirements, they are subject to appropriate enforcement action and revisit(s) where compliance cannot be assessed by other means
• ensure revisits focus on the contraventions identified at the last planned programmed inspection and ensure they have been remedied before deciding that no further action is required.  The revisit inspection form will be standard inspection form for that business. The officer should cross reference to the original inspection report. More than one revisit may take place as necessary and
• in all cases of non-compliance, explain to the FeBO what action is needed to secure compliance and record in writing. 

The primary objective of any enforcement action must be to achieve compliance in the most effective way and the approach should be in line with the “hierarchy of enforcement” explained in the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy.

The practice of giving advice, and communicating by letter about enforcement issues, are well- established informal approaches to enforcement that are understood by feed businesses. 

Generally, any feed business assessed as having less than ‘satisfactory compliance’ with feed hygiene legislation or poses a risk to animal or human health will be subject to a revisit(s), when compliance cannot be assessed by other means e.g. by submission of evidence of resolution such as new or revised documents, photographs or training records.  A revisit should, where practicable, be undertaken by the officer that undertook the original or inspection. 

Revisits must focus on the contraventions identified at the last planned programmed inspection and ensure that they have been remedied before deciding that no further action is required.

The timing of the revisit will be determined by the action taken because of the earlier inspection and will depend on the nature of the feed safety concern and the works required. The revisit inspection form will be the standard inspection form for that business. More than one revisit may take place as necessary.  If an officer considers, after consulting the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy that formal enforcement action is the most appropriate route to compliance, they should consult FSS as described in Chapter 7. Follow-up actions to verify compliance may be remote assessments (see 6.5.5) 

Inspection ratings should not be re–assessed at visits other than inspections. A revisit would not constitute an inspection.

For enforcement revisits i.e. following the service of a notice, the timing for the revisit will be determined by the notice requirements and time. Enforcement revisits should consider the inspection report/schedule of works/notices produced because of the initial inspection. The outcome of the enforcement revisit should be communicated to the FeBO. If the revisit is to check compliance with a statutory notice, then the officer should write to the feed business operator confirming whether compliance has been achieved and whether any further action may be taken such as a further revisit or enforcement action. A record of the revisit and subsequent actions should be made on the relevant inspection form and uploaded to the FMIS.

Feed Business Improvement Notices (FBINs) should be used in line with the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy and must be considered as part of the escalation of enforcement action in line with the hierarchy of enforcement. If the Authorised Officer has reason to believe that an informal approach will not result in a successful outcome, then a more formal approach should be considered.

Since a breach of a FBIN is a criminal offence, officers should carefully consider whether they are appropriate in the circumstances and in line with the FSS Feed Delivery Enforcement Policy. A FBIN, once served, may be appealed if the business does not agree with the conditions of the FBIN. Care should be taken to make sure that evidence of the non- compliance is obtained, its continuity maintained and that the relevant procedures have been followed when issuing a FBIN.

FBINs may be appropriate in any of the following circumstances or a combination thereof: 

• where formal action is proportionate to the risk to animal or human health
• where there is a record of non-compliance with breaches of specified feed law listed in the Hygiene Regulations
• where the Authorised Officer has reason to believe that an informal approach will not be successful. 

The Feed Business Improvement Notice can be found at Annex 7.1.

FBINs would not be appropriate in the following circumstances:

• in transient situations, and where it is considered that swift enforcement action is needed. A Feed Business Emergency Prohibition Notice (FBEPN) would be the only formal remedy which would have immediate effect
• where there is a breach of good hygiene practice but no failure to comply with an appropriate regulation.

Generally, FBIN should not be used to require withdrawal of product in circumstances where the FeBO would have no obligation to do so under Article 20 of  Regulation (EC) 178/2002

It should be clear from the FBIN, the grounds for failure to comply with a relevant provision of specified feed law, the matters which constitute the failure to comply, and the measures (or equivalent measures) the recipient is required to take to address. Notices should be clear and easy to understand. To avoid confused drafting, ensure the notice is understandable to the FeBO and any time frames for compliance fit with the escalation of each issue.

It may be possible to cite more than one non-compliance in a notice provided:

• the issues are of the same theme
• the action required of the FeBO can rectify all the failures cited on the notice and
• the timeframes for compliance are all the same. Note: as failure to comply with the requirements of a FBIN within the specified period is an offence, an officer should consider whether a single notice with a single time limit is appropriate.

Using multiple notices, each with a different time limit, may be more appropriate where multiple contraventions are concerned. Separate notices with separate time limits may also be easier to handle if there is an appeal. An appeal against a single notice concerning multiple contraventions would result in the suspension of the whole notice until the appeal had been dealt with.

In respect of a FBIN requiring structural work to be carried out, ideally the officer will discuss the detail of any such work with the FeBO, or with a person acting on the FeBO’s behalf who is in a position to authorise the work, before a notice is issued, and reach agreement with them on what should be done, and timing. However, the issue of a notice should not be unduly delayed if agreement cannot be reached or a responsible person cannot be contacted.

It is the FeBO’s responsibility to obtain any necessary planning permission required to undertake any building works to improve the structure of the establishment.

FBINs should make it clear that Regulation 17(1)(d) of the Hygiene Regulations allows a FeBO to carry out measures of at least equivalent effect to those specified in a FBIN. Although it is for the FeBO to decide how they will comply with the objectives of the legislation, it is recommended that alternative measures are discussed with the officer who served the notice before starting work to avoid unnecessary expenditure or inappropriate work. 

The officer should respond in writing to any request from a FeBO to vary the work, and any agreed alternative measures should be confirmed in writing.

Disputes between the officer and FeBO should be referred to FDB, as necessary. If the officer has any concerns about enforcement action they are to take, they should discuss with the FDB. 

A FBIN should clearly state the time limit by which the measures required by the notice must be completed. The Hygiene Regulations specify a minimum period of 14 days. An appeal may be lodged against the time limit, so it must be realistic, justifiable and have regard to the extent and complexity of the measures required.

Where circumstances allow, it is good practice to discuss and agree the time limit with the FeBO or a person acting on the FeBO’s behalf, who can agree a time limit before a notice is issued. The officer may, however, set a reasonable time limit without such agreement, if agreement cannot be reached or a responsible person cannot be contacted.

The following factors should be taken into consideration in setting a time limit:

• the risk to public and/or animal health
• the nature of the problem and
• the availability of solutions.

Although FBINs are to be complied with by the stipulated time limit, Authorised Officers should give due regard to any genuine difficulties that may occur in achieving compliance by that deadline. There is no specific provision in the Regulations to extend the time limit for compliance with a notice, but it may be unreasonable not to allow an extension if the FeBO has a genuine reason for needing more time. If the FeBO requests an extension to the time limit specified in the Notice, the request should be made in writing and received by the Authorised Officer or FDB prior to the expiry of the Notice.

Before issuing a new Notice, the officer must consider again whether the conditions prevailing at the premises still warrant the issuing of another notice. If the officer is satisfied that there is a genuine reason for such an extension, the existing notice should be withdrawn and a new notice issued reflecting the new time limit by which compliance must be achieved. The Officer should make a note of the reasons for their decision on the withdrawn notice.  

However, the officer should never issue such a notice automatically. When deliberating a request for an extension of the time limit, the officer should always consider whether the facts at that time justify such an extension, taking account of:

• the reason for the request
• the remedy involved
• the risk to public health associated with the fault if an extension was granted
• past record of co-operation of the operator / proprietor
• any temporary action which the operator / proprietor proposes to take to rectify the non-compliance and
• demonstrable evidence of steps taken to address the requirements contained in the Notice.