Consumer group Which? has published a new report on the capacity and performance of Local Authority Trading Standards services which it says exposes ‘shocking differences in staffing levels depending on where people live’.
Responses from 187 Trading Standards services in England, Scotland and Wales were gathered through a Freedom of Information request and reveal the extent to which budget cuts have diminished Trading Standards capacity, with some local authorities operating a skeleton service with fewer than one Trading Standards Officer per 100,000 people.
According to Rocio Concha, Which? Director of Policy and Advocacy, “Our research shows that Trading Standards is no longer fit for purpose. Millions of people face a postcode lottery, which dictates whether they get adequate protection from crime, dangerous products and blatant rip-offs.
“The government could be spending taxpayers’ money more wisely. Without urgent reform to the current system, there could be disastrous consequences for consumers, responsible businesses and economic growth. Which? is calling for the government to look at overhauling the consumer enforcement system as part of its spending review, with more scrutiny of its effectiveness, better use of intelligence, sharing of services and more oversight and accountability.”
CTSI, which represents Trading Standards professionals across the UK, has advocated repeatedly for greater funding and resources to support Trading Standards. The Institute’s Manifesto, published in 2024, called for greater investment in Trading Standards and a review of the funding model to put the service on a more sustainable, secure and long-term footing.
CTSI Chief Executive, John Herriman, commented: “We are acutely aware of the financial pressures that Local Authority Trading Standards services have faced over the last decade or more.
“While these findings from Which? help us to make the case for further investment in the service, it is important to acknowledge that there has been a great deal of innovation across Local Authority Trading Standards in response to funding constraints. It is a testament to the hard work of Local Authority teams how the profession has evolved and is rolling with the punches.
“Recent initiatives to future-proof the profession include investing in new apprenticeships, adopting an intelligence-led model to help prioritise work, and building effective partnerships both locally and nationally. These have yielded some impressive results.
“Last year Trading Standards helped to prevent over £600m of consumer detriment and our work has helped to save lives and protect consumers. However, there is no escaping the fact that our Trading Standards service is severely under-resourced and that this research from Which? points to the stark fact that unless our service is properly resourced consumers continue to be at risk from unscrupulous businesses.”
Staffing disparities
Which? found significant disparities in Trading Standards staffing levels across the country, with three London boroughs having just one or two members of staff, equating to fewer than one per 100,000 residents. Enfield has the smallest team, with 0.43 staff per 100,000 people.
By comparison, Devon, Somerset, Plymouth and Torbay – which sit under the Heart of the South West Trading Standards umbrella – have 67 total staff and 3.7 staff per 100,000 people. Lancashire County Council has 55.6 total staff and 4.44 per 100,000 people. In Orkney, there are almost five staff covering the islands – the equivalent of almost 21 staff per 100,000 people.
Liverpool City Council, with 5.5 staff in total (1.11 staff per 100,000 people) and Barnsley Borough Council, with 3.1 staff (1.26 staff per 100,000 people), were among the areas found to have low staffing levels.
However, Herriman cautioned, “While the Which? research paints a useful picture, it is important not to draw too many comparisons between local authorities as each community across the UK is different, and the provision of Trading Standards in somewhere like Orkney, with over 70 islands, may be very different from an urban metropolitan borough – in effect you could end up comparing apples with pears. However, the point still stands that resourcing continues to be a challenge.
“The research also doesn’t give voice to the many consumers and businesses who have found their local Trading Standards service invaluable to helping them resolve issues that they could not have otherwise achieved. In addition, there is no mention of the preventative work undertaken daily, across all parts of the consumer protection landscape, crucial in preventing consumer and business harm and detriment.
“We, along with our partners across the four nations of the Trading Standards profession, are very keen to fully understand the findings from the Which? research. Together with regulators, national and local government and other partners we will continue to work to identify these and other issues to help us to anticipate, plan and respond to these and other challenges.”
Valerie Simpson, Chair of the Association of Chief Trading Standards Officers (ACTSO), said: “We believe that real investment is needed to support new apprentices into the profession and the existing well-established regional and national framework. However we do not believe that another review of consumer protection structures will address the issues.”
Fiona Richardson, Chief Officer for Trading Standards Scotland, commented: “The declining workforce coupled with an increasing range of legislation to enforce is creating serious issues for the service. Prioritisation and effective use of intelligence is required to ensure Trading Standards can continue to prevent and tackle consumer detriment.”
Funding for Regulatory Services as a whole (including Trading Standards, Environmental Health, Licensing and Planning) has fallen by around 25% over the past 15 years. As evidenced in a 2021 National Audit Office (NAO) report, Trading Standards has suffered 39% budget cuts and a 2023 NAO report evidenced a cut of 25% to Regulatory Services budgets. Trading Standards has suffered budget cuts of approximately 50% and has therefore been hit twice as hard as any other Regulatory Service, according to CTSI.
