A woman who placed an advertisement in her local paper offering to iron 10lb loads of clothes has been visited at her home by Cambridgeshire Trading Standards officers.

She has been ordered to advertise the weight of clothes in kilograms and to reprint her invoices.

This sort of action makes me mad, If she wants to advertise in pounds, she should have every right to do so.

Thanks, BWMA, this posts reminds me of why I contribute to the coffers of the BWMA and I shall send my cheque soon.

Home visits by TSOs? Into a private dwelling?

I sincerely hope that BWMA are doing something about this and at least get some press publicity / media interest into it.

The Sun could be the first port of call, BWMA....

Please?

If they have time to waste on this, they must have really solved the problem of those pesky grocers using Imperial.

Does she actually charge per pound or per load? (where a "load" is a basket weighing 10 lbs or less). Of course, in either units, she probably uses a scale "not legal for trade."

I notice that three years elapsed between the initial post on this thread and the second post.

I have to say I'm with BWMA on this one.

It was a private advertisement so she can use whatever units she wants. Why she was using a weight in the first place, rather than pricing per piece is beyond me! But thats not the point. I don't know about anyone else but I can't really imagine how much a shirt weighs.

When you think of all the areas where metrication hasn't even begun (eg road signs) the rigid enforcement of something like this seems even more ludicrous.

<<I notice that three years elapsed between the initial post on this thread and the second post.>>

I believe we have been "had" by the "new post" message luring us here. :)

<<
It was a private advertisement so she can use whatever units she wants.
>>

Aren't all advertisements private? If a grocery store puts up a banner or prints an ad in a newspaper saying that apples are so much per pound, isn't that private? Someone explain the difference between an ad for fruit and an ad for laundry.

My apologies.

I realise now that the initial post was yonks ago (as pointed out by martin) - the second post made me think it was more recent (I didn't read everything clearly!)

However: Andy: "Why she was using a weight in the first place, rather than pricing per piece is beyond me!"

That's the way they do it in the world of washing and ironing services.

Bud's point was valid too, that all transactions between individuals are private but this one is particularly sinister as it required officials of the state to gain entry into someone's house in order to tell them that they should use and say "kilogramme".

Tell you what - the whole idea of this particular "raid" makes me feel sick.

No doubt Danny will be well and truly "spent" - if you get my drift.

<<<Aren't all advertisements private? If a grocery store puts up a banner or prints an ad in a newspaper saying that apples are so much per pound, isn't that private? Someone explain the difference between an ad for fruit and an ad for laundry. >>>

I think the difference is that a shop selling fruit is an official business, and is therefore subject to trading standards regulations such as the certifying of scales etc.

To be honest I'm not sure where the line is drawn and at what point someone advertising a service in the private ads becomes a business.

<<<That's the way they do it in the world of washing and ironing services. >>>

well you learn something new every day. can't say I've ever used them!

You have a girlfriend

;-)


----

Note to Danny: "Girlfriend"- a member of the opposite sex, if you are male, that is involved in a sexual and/or close/loving relationship with the male involved. Often obtained by enjoying social gatherings, meeting with friends etc and seldom achieved by spending nights measuring vinyl records.

<<
I think the difference is that a shop selling fruit is an official business, and is therefore subject to trading standards regulations such as the certifying of scales etc.

To be honest I'm not sure where the line is drawn and at what point someone advertising a service in the private ads becomes a business.
>>


I think the line is basically drawn according to the size of the business. A woman working on her own, from her own home, should be left alone, but a large corporation with more assets should be harassed by TSOs. I don't see any difference between these two cases other than the size of the business, which leads to an emotional factor.

Bud asked

<<
Aren't all advertisements private? If a grocery store puts up a banner or prints an ad in a newspaper saying that apples are so much per pound, isn't that private? Someone explain the difference between an ad for fruit and an ad for laundry.
>>

UK law distinguishes between "private" and "trade" advertisements. I don't know the details of where the line is drawn, but local newspapers draw attention to this distinction in the columns relating to motor car sales.

I honestly believe that the distinction you are talking about has nothing to do with measures.

Like, for example, a rogue trader trying to shift a used car by private means (and thus without regulation, warranty, etc)

The Business Advertisements (Disclosure) Order 1977 is the piece of legislation that requires trade sellers of goods to make it clear (within their advertisements) that they are in trade.

As Stimpy suggests above, the main reason for the legislation is to stop car traders posing as private sellers, thus denying consumers certain of their civil law Sale of Goods Act rights & attempting to circumvent the criminal sanctions within the Trade Descriptions Act.

It only applies to sales of goods, not to supplies of services - so it wouldn't apply to the ironing lady.

However, it is obvious from her advert that she is in trade. I would assume that she is trading from her home address. Trading Standards are required (by the UK govt - not by the EC!) to keep records of all traders in their area. They have to visit all traders on that database at specified intervals

WMA '85 (UK legislation, not EC legislation)

79
General powers of inspection and entry

(1)Subject to the production if so requested of his credentials, an inspector may, within the area for which he was appointed inspector, at all reasonable times—......

......(c) enter any premises at which he has reasonable cause to believe there to be any such equipment or goods, not being premises used only as a private dwelling-house.

As the ironing lady trades from her house, it is not "used ONLY as a private dwelling house". It is her trade premises.

That's exactly what I said, Beranger. She is just as much a trader as Steve Thoburn was. So why are people complaining about the TSOs bothering her?

Bud's perspective is the same as mine, but most metric-only folk won't pick up on the point.

Berenger - don't you find it slightly squirmy and uncomfortable that a lady who's been ironing for, possibly, years to regular customers who pay here and have paid her for years in the way that both sides of the transaction have used and preferred should be visited by people of the state in her own living room to tell her that she must change the way she weighs in?

Can't you see something a little intrusive and invasive in that?

I recognised that some (as in "Danny") would probably like to see her taken off in hand-cuffs but surely most right-minded people would see discomfort in this.

And yes, although the rules of visit will be UK, the reason for the visit is more to do with what my mum and dad voted 'yes' for in a referendum a few decades back.

"She is just as much a trader as Steve Thoburn was. So why are people complaining about the TSOs bothering her?"

Would this be the same people that complained (and are still complaining) about Steve Thoburn's prosecution? Most objections seem to regard the metrication issue rather than the "home visits" aspect.

As far as I can see, only Bud & Stimpy have any objection to TSO's visiting trade premises that happen to be someone's home.

Are they suggesting that TSO's stop visiting: -
1) Family run small hotels/guest houses/B&B's
2) Farms (especially ones that legally bottle pints of milk!)
3) Small (licenced or unlicenced) car dealers or car clockers
4) The vast majority of pyramid selling/envelope addressing scams
5) Small joiners/builders/plumbers/electricians
6) Traders that make dangerous toys at home
7) Home producers of jam/honey/bread etc that are sold in other people's shops
8) Counterfeit CD/DVD "factories"
9) Hardcore porn distributors
10) Rural Post Offices in people's houses
11) Home visits to complainants

"a lady who's been ironing for, possibly, years to regular customers who pay here and have paid her for years in the way that both sides of the transaction have used and preferred"

Stimpy - if you reread the original posting, you will see that the visit was in response to an advert touting for new business. The trader seems happy to invite the entire readership of the newspaper to turn up at her door.

"And yes, although the rules of visit will be UK, the reason for the visit is more to do with what my mum and dad voted 'yes' for in a referendum a few decades back."

If the advert had appeared at any time in the last 150 years or so, the local TSO's would still have been under an obligation to visit & test the scales at routine intervals.

Beranger, all I am wondering is why some pro-metrics that were in favour of Steve Thoburn's conviction are against the TSO's visiting this lady. Her house is a place of business, as you pointed out, so under the law it is the same as Steve Thoburn's shop.

Berenger - look at your list. It has a lot to do with protecting the customer. A lady ironing shirts by the pound, asked for by the pound is off your scale. You cannot equate pyrimid schemes and hardcore porn with "£4.99 /lb".

Bergy: "As far as I can see, only Bud & Stimpy have any objection to TSO's visiting trade premises that happen to be someone's home."

Pro metric Andy: "I have to say I'm with BWMA on this one."

Something tells me that most mildly pro-metric (but not overconcerned) people would echo this view.

For those "in the middle" it's the sort of thing that will push them to being anti-metric. Add the EU indredient into the media potion and you've got another convert to Anti-EU anti-metric.

So, it's been 4 years, 3 months. Has this case worked its way through the justice system yet? We need an update. We need closure. :)

Steve

Your main point on this thread seemed to be about TSO's visiting people's homes - not the usual boring "metrication was forced on us by Europe" argument (But I see you managed to get it in anyway)

I responded with a list of visits that TSO's might make to private homes. I agree that certain potential offences that I detail on the list I gave are far more serious than the ironing example.

OK - lets take out the non W&M examples and see what is left on the list

1) Family run small hotels/guest houses/B&B's (if they sell alcohol)
2) Farms (especially ones that legally bottle pints of milk!)
7) Home producers of jam/honey/bread etc that are sold in other people's shops
10) Rural Post Offices in people's houses

All users of W&M equipment - just like the ironing lady.

My point was that TSO's visit private houses (that are also used for trade) on a regular basis.

You seem to have a problem with this - viz:-

"Home visits by TSOs? Into a private dwelling?"

"this one is particularly sinister as it required officials of the state to gain entry into someone's house"

"this particular "raid" makes me feel sick"

"visited by people of the state in her own living room to tell her that she must change the way she weighs in?"

As I said before, had she been in trade in 1875. 1906, 1934, 1950 or 1977, her imperial scales would still have been subject to inspection on a regular basis. Do you have a problem with "people of the state" ensuring that imperial measure is correct?

Your point seems to relate purely to the metrication argument rather to any changes to TSO's policies regarding visits since metrication.

Bud

Ask the pro-mets involved!

I would suggest that some consider metrication of UK roads to be more important than the issue under consideration here, but fail to realise that different authorities regulate measurement on roads & measurement in the marketplace.

John

I would assume that the lady involved took the professional legal advice of the TSO involved rather than relying on politically motivated opinions that have since been judged as being incorrect in every UK & EC court that these opinions have been argued in.

Not every case results in prosecution.

<<Do you have a problem with "people of the state" ensuring that imperial measure is correct?>>

Actually - instinctively I do.

If someone comes into my house and I give him a pint, or litre of cider and he agrees with the price and the physical look of it then, even if I'm trading, the transaction is betwixt him and me. It's actually private. If I short change him then I lose my reputation and my income. I'd rather that than someone official come in to that same house and say "Hey you two! Use a unit that you don't normally use frequently and you, the customer, can trust me, the official of the state, that you are getting the correct amount despite the fact I cannot be here 100% of the time to ensure this".

BTW - I did not mention Europe. Being pro-european and pro-British I have no need to lump the blame with people from Germany, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland etc.

A big "P.S." :- I am not having a go at TSO's per sé - I am having a go at one particular function. I am indebted to them for protecting our kids from dangerous toys from disreputable sellers and hope that most of their efforts are channelled at continuing to protect those kids from injury or even death over a lady ironing some bloke's shirts for 4.99/lb.

I do take issue with the "hardcore porn" thing though - not because I'm a fan but rather it would be inconsistent with my libertarian views if I were to support censorship in regards to what "grown-ups" can watch in the privacy of their own home.

Steve

I really have to disagree. The argument that I am going to advance below has nothing to do with Imperial v Metric or UK v EC.

You seem to suggest that every "trade" sale of goods by W&M is actually a "private" transaction between two individuals.

If your contention is actually correct, may I ask a few questions - and I hope you will answer each and every one (please note that that the questions have all been expressed in Steve's favoured Imperial Units)

1) You sell a "pint" of cider. Your customer suggests that your glass contains 17 (UK) fl. oz. How do either of you ascertain exactly how much the glass contained?

2) You decide to visit Tesco & buy "8oz" of Smoked Appledale cheese. You get home & your scales read 6oz. How do you resolve this when Tesco say "our scales are correct?"

3) You believe that your local filling station (who are selling at the equivalent of £4 per gallon) are delivering short measure - how do you check whether the pump is correct or not?

4) You are a trader selling stone chippings for driveways by the ton. A customer alleges that you have delivered 5 tons when 7 tons were ordered. What do you do?

5) The local suppliers of kerosene for your central heating system state that they delivered 200 gallons. You know that they delivered only 150 gallons. How do you prove this?

6) Mrs H's engagement ring contains a 100 carat diamond (K wishes!!!!! - Joke!) You believe that it isn't. How do you prove that it isn't?

7) You weigh your ironing that you send to your local "Iron Lady" (I wondered what she did nowadays) You thought it weighed 9lb 15oz. She says it weighed 10lb 10oz & charges you £9.98. What now?

If the state did not provide these W&M services (through "officials of the state") - I would suggest that the above equipment to prove all these W&M civil breaches would cost you around £20,000 - and that is a very conservative estimate ofthe cost.

Good luck!

Beranger, it is not necessary for the state to specify which units may be used for transactions in order to ensure that the transactions are fair and the customer is not being shortchanged. For example, if the state wishes to calibrate petrol pumps by the litre, and test them to make sure they are delivering the number of litres specified, that is fine. Then, if the owner decides to change the price to gallons, this does not mean that the state's ability to ensure fairness is affected.

Which units are used and the seller's ability to shortchange the customer are two separate issues; one does not affect the other.

Bud

With respect

Steve seems to be suggesting that all transactions are private - and can therefore be in any units that both parties wish.

I am only pointing out the potential costs if Steve is (allegedly) short-measured under the system he proposes.

You cannot have it both ways - either you have a system where the state regulates measure - or a system where individuals have to prove each individual breach of their rights.

As I suggested before - will Steve hire a weighbridge unit to prove that the chippings he bought for his driveway were short weight?

The daily hire rate will cost more than the cost of the chippings - he faces losing a large amount of money if he is proved wrong

My argument has been based upon the size of the business to a degree (ie:- lady doing ironing versus huge conglomerate selling toys with concealed spikes).
However I will humbly try to answer your q's....



1) You sell a "pint" of cider. Your customer suggests that your glass contains 17 (UK) fl. oz. How do either of you ascertain exactly how much the glass contained?

> Apart from familiarity with the size there is a certain degree of trust. However I do recognise that someone "in the know" should confirm that if a unit is being quoted then it should be that unit. A TSO should be able to test this in an advisory role and thereafter the law should allow or disallow the mention of "pint" accordingly. He can continue trading if they are 17floz - but cannot call it a pint. Of course he may lose customers by doing this - that's the beauty of the free market.

2) You decide to visit Tesco & buy "8oz" of Smoked Appledale cheese. You get home & your scales read 6oz. How do you resolve this when Tesco say "our scales are correct?"

> Ask for the manager ;-) Again - this is big versus small and my point that TSO should be an advisory force. Stop them from calling things oz or g rather than tell them which one to use.

3) You believe that your local filling station (who are selling at the equivalent of £4 per gallon) are delivering short measure - how do you check whether the pump is correct or not?

> See answer 2. Although even if the world's finest TSO had popped in last week to check that the system was precise I could still find myself in position of asking Q3 again!

4) You are a trader selling stone chippings for driveways by the ton. A customer alleges that you have delivered 5 tons when 7 tons were ordered. What do you do?

> How would one know that from visual? Anyway - its back to my view on what you are allowed to call things. If I were the trader perhaps I can find a way of proving the weight to the customer by showing him the weight in more than one weighing place?

5) The local suppliers of kerosene for your central heating system state that they delivered 200 gallons. You know that they delivered only 150 gallons. How do you prove this?

> This is a different unit on a similar question.

6) Mrs H's engagement ring contains a 100 carat diamond (K wishes!!!!! - Joke!) You believe that it isn't. How do you prove that it isn't?

> By pointing out that the jewel is, in fact, not a diamond! ;-)
> Erm - how do I get to the point when I believe that diamond's carat status is correct or not.

7) You weigh your ironing that you send to your local "Iron Lady" (I wondered what she did nowadays) You thought it weighed 9lb 15oz. She says it weighed 10lb 10oz & charges you £9.98. What now?

> I'll go elsewhere. The reality is that in the free market way she'll meet my accusation and charge to that rather than her price.

Which is a good point. Bartering.

So a question to you:-------

1) If a market seller tries to sell me a pound of beef for £3.00 and I say back to him "make it £2.00" and he says ok - do you prosecute him for labelling and claiming a pound of beef is £3.00 whereas the pound he weighs out is 1/3rd over a real pound weight for the cash transaction that ensues?

and finally...

find it in your heart to be brutally honest about this next question:

2) Which would be seen as more important/more succesful/more resource justified: Prosecuting 10000 butchers for selling pounds of meet to a public asking for pounds of meet on a machine that only weighs in pounds #OR# prosecuting just one trader that sells dangerous toys intended for kids between the ages of 0 and 5?

Q2 is a real scruples question and the intended proposition is that you can choose only one or the other choice.

Steve

"He can continue trading if they are 17floz - but cannot call it a pint."

Remember that draught cider must currently be sold by the 1/3 pint, the half pint & the pint.

Many people will drive cars after 1.5 pints - confident of being under the drink-driving limit. It's a bit harder if the drink sizes vary from bar to bar. It's why wine was added to the prescribed sizes (125ml & 175ml) a few years ago.

"A TSO should be able to test this in an advisory role"

But why should the TSO do this? If, as you contend, it is a private sale, then the matter is between you & your customer. It is a civil law matter - not a criminal one. Why should "the state" be involved?

"Stop them from calling things oz or g rather than tell them which one to use."

I don't really understand what you mean here - can you rephrase?

"How would one know that from visual?"

5 tons looks around 5/7ths of the size of 7 tons! :-):-)

Believe me - this is a complaint that TSO's receive on a regular basis

"This is a different unit on a similar question"

Yes - you need a weighbridge or a large platform machine to check the 1st one & a reference meter to test the second one. The TSO isn't going to lend you his (its a civil matter remember)

"Erm - how do I get to the point when I believe that diamond's carat status is correct or not."

Mrs H's pal has just shown you her brand-new 5 carat engagement ring - the stone is larger than the one you bought.

"I'll go elsewhere"

And I thought you were such a fan of Mrs. Thatcher!

"1) If a market seller tries to sell me a pound of beef for £3.00 and I say back to him "make it £2.00" and he says ok - do you prosecute him for labelling and claiming a pound of beef is £3.00 whereas the pound he weighs out is 1/3rd over a real pound weight for the cash transaction that ensues?"

As long as he uses a metric scale to measure 450g (or over) and has £6.61/kg marked on his price board (plus £3.00/lb if he wants) he will only commit an offence if he charges a higher price than indicated.

My favourite fishmonger has a habit of rounding every price indication on his scales down to the 50p below (ie price on scales = £5.93 - price charged = £5.50)

"2) Which would be seen as more important/more succesful/more resource justified: Prosecuting 10000 butchers for selling pounds of meet to a public asking for pounds of meet on a machine that only weighs in pounds #OR# prosecuting just one trader that sells dangerous toys intended for kids between the ages of 0 and 5?"

I doubt that there are 10,000 butchers in the UK using the equipment you described!

I believe that my local TSD has a priority list. Explosives/Petroleum incidents top the list.
Other safety alerts (especially toy safety) are second.

As an example, when the ban on soft plastic sucker darts measuring less than 5cm was immediately introduced after the tragic deaths of 2 kids that had swalloed them, I believe that the local TSO's visited every toyshop in the area within the day - but not to prosecute, just to get the things off sale.

Beranger, you have to remember why the Trading Standards offices were created. They were created to ensure fair trading, not to help the government push its agenda. Let me put it this way: if TSOs stopped going after people on the grounds that they were using unauthorised units, can you honestly say that dishonesty among traders would increase? Think of it from a realistic perspective, not in theory.

Bud

I have to diagree again.

The modern TSO is a literal descendent of an Assisor of Bread & Ale (there's a job I would love) in 1266.

These posts were created to ensure fair Weights & Measures.

The Fair Trading, Quality & Safety roles have only been created in the last 100 years or so,

Beranger (or anyone else), could you please clarify the difference between TSOs and Fair Trading, Quality & Safety roles? Thank you.

OK Bud, I'll try to explain how it all developed.

My point was in response to your assertion that Trading Standards Departments "were created to ensure fair trading, not to help the government push its agenda."

Perhaps the confusion has arisen because we are using the words "fair trading" to mean different things.

I would suggest that you may be meaning "fair use of weights & measures"

However, the enforcement functions of a UK Trading Standards Department are usually split into 4 groups of legislation

1) Metrology - all Weights & Measures work

2) Fair Trading - Price Marking, Misleading Prices, Consumer Credit, Trade Descriptions, Counterfeiting, Hallmarking and similar

3) Safety - Product Safety, Explosives, Petroleum, Under Age Sales etc

4) Quality - Food Standards/Labelling, Fertiliser & Animal Feed Standards/Labelling, etc

My point was that the main duties of Trading Standards Officers have changed significantly over the years.

100 years ago, TSO's had no significant Fair Trading function - there was something called the Merchandise Marks Acts - the first of which was passed in 1887. These were earlier forerunners of todays Trade Marks Act.

Every other major piece of Fair Trading legislation was added in the last 40 years or so.

100 years ago, the TSO's spent around 90% of their time on Metrology duties. These duties included pushing the agenda of the Government of that time.

That agenda included the development of the system of "stamping" trade equipment and ensuring that certain "prescribed" goods were only sold in specific imperial quantities.

The Government enacts the law & the TSO's enforce it.

If a new UK government was elected tomorrow & outlawed metric, the TSO's would then be tasked with going round the traders & saying "forget everything - here are the new rules"

Bud wrote

<<
if TSOs stopped going after people on the grounds that they were using unauthorised units, can you honestly say that dishonesty among traders would increase? Think of it from a realistic perspective, not in theory.
>>

Yes, it most certainly would. If you think otherwise, you live in cloud-cuckoo land.

A number of years ago (before I knew how to lodge an official complaint), I was sold a "gallon" of motor engine oil which turned out to be a US gallon - I was being swindled out of 20% of what the trader said I was getting. That was not an isolated case.

<<Remember that draught cider must currently be sold by the 1/3 pint, the half pint & the pint.>>

Is that right? You an get a 1/3 pint? I've never seen one (although I'm willing to take your word for it - but I 've never seen it).

<<Mrs H's pal has just shown you her brand-new 5 carat engagement ring - the stone is larger than the one you bought.>>

Well you've taught me something - i thought the carat was a quality gauge rather than a size one.

<<The modern TSO is a literal descendent of an Assisor of Bread & Ale (there's a job I would love) in 1266.>>

You miss Bud's point. More recently the TSOs have been used to ensure that happy people using lb based machines with no problems and a full understanding of lbs had to start using kg based machines with serveral issues using a scale they're not familiar with.

Hence the bizzare situation of "I'd like a pound of beef please" - "Certainly" (weighs out 454g).

You must admit that this drive is very different to the role of TSO's in the past (who I admit had to enforce a "proper pound"). I'm sure you can see the sentiment here and are being devil's advocate.

The other arguments are getting tedious - I don't want to get into the type of argument you and Tony have. "I'm right, you're wrong", "no I'm right you're wrong".

Feel free to get Danny/eric to write your victory speach if you wish ;-)

<<Well you've taught me something - i thought the carat was a quality gauge rather than a size one.
>>

The metric carat is 200 mg. Not sure what the "old" carat was, but close to that. Just tell her that lovely 5 carat ring is 1 g of compressed coal; that will put it in perspective.

You're thinking of karat, which is the fraction of pure gold, conveniently measured in 1/24ths to satisfy those who love fractions.

Neither should be confused with a carrot.

<<
Just tell her that lovely 5 carat ring is 1 g of compressed coal
>>

... the compression needed is 5GPa (or 50,000 bars). At any rate that is the compression that I used when I was making diamonds in the 1970's. I kid not - when I lived in SOuth Africa I worked for de Beers!

Back then, I assume they were "industrial grade" that no one would mistake for a gem?

Now, DeBeers is terrified of the quality of manmade diamonds of "gem" quality. (I saw a TV show on the subject a while ago. The quality seems pretty impressive.)

Steve

1/3 pint - I've never seen one either, but (without checking) I'm sure that it is still legal! Can I dare to say that it's a customary measure that nobody wants?

"More recently the TSOs have been used" - my point exactly!

This site (especially this patricular board) could perhaps be accused of demonising TSO's (look at the title!) As I suggest above, should a new UK government be elected & outlaw metric, the TSO's would go out & enforce these laws in exactly the same way.

I would suggest that they would do the same professional job that they are trying to do with regard to the current situation - advise, warn & (as a last resort) prosecute.

The only difference would be that you, I and everyone else on here would be posting on the UKMA equivalent of "Trading Standards Alert"

"The other arguments are getting tedious - I don't want to get into the type of argument you and Tony have. "I'm right, you're wrong", "no I'm right you're wrong"."

But I'm right! :-) :-) :-)

That is your right as a Scotsman.

;-)

<<
Back then, I assume they were "industrial grade" that no one would mistake for a gem?
>>

They were certainly industrial quality diamonds - the bread and butter product was diamond grit which was used as an industrial paste. I was however involved in on experiemnt were we grew a 1 carat diamond - the process took a week (unlike the process in nature which took many years) and the result was a stone that did not look at all special.

I do not know what has happened in the last 25 years - although I have recently resetablished contact with some of my old colleagues, they have not told me anything what has happened in the interim.

<<
Yes, it most certainly would. If you think otherwise, you live in cloud-cuckoo land.

A number of years ago (before I knew how to lodge an official complaint), I was sold a "gallon" of motor engine oil which turned out to be a US gallon - I was being swindled out of 20% of what the trader said I was getting. That was not an isolated case.
>>

Martin, the problem there is not that the store was selling in terms of an unauthorised unit; they were selling in terms of an authorised unit but defined differently. I said that traders should be allowed to use whatever units they want, I never said that they should be free to define those units however they want.

<<Martin, the problem there is not that the store was selling in terms of an unauthorised unit; they were selling in terms of an authorised unit but defined differently.>>

I don't know UK law, but I very much doubt the US gallon is authorized for trade there. The Imperial gallon isn't here (although consumers would love the extra 20%). The FPLA (really the supporting FDA rules) is crystal clear on fluid capacity that it refers to the US gallon of 231 in^3 and its submultiples. Nothing else except the Customary and SI contents can be within a certain distance of the net contents area of the principal display panel. You might get away with hiding an Imperial gallon as "information" on the backside.

Countries determine both the allowable units and their magnitudes when they determine weights and measures.

Bud wrote

<<
Martin, the problem there is not that the store was selling in terms of an unauthorised unit; they were selling in terms of an authorised unit but defined differently. I said that traders should be allowed to use whatever units they want, I never said that they should be free to define those units however they want.
>>

Bud, either you run a small stall in your spare time and you rip customers off whenever you can or you are totally gullible. What more can I say?

<<
I don't know UK law, but I very much doubt the US gallon is authorized for trade there.
>>
You're right. It isn't, and hasn't been since 1824.


<<
The Imperial gallon isn't here (although consumers would love the extra 20%). The FPLA (really the supporting FDA rules) is crystal clear on fluid capacity that it refers to the US gallon of 231 in^3 and its submultiples. Nothing else except the Customary and SI contents can be within a certain distance of the net contents area of the principal display panel. You might get away with hiding an Imperial gallon as "information" on the backside.
>>
I have seen things sold in the US that are labelled in UK gallons. I imagine they were coming from Canada. The letters "UK" do appear before the "gal.", and the litres are in brackets. The store simply puts a sticker on each can with the volume in US gallons and litres in brackets. I don't know if this was legal under FPLA, but I don't think anyone did anything about it. However, I haven't seen this for a while now, probably because Canada now uses litres only.


<<
Countries determine both the allowable units and their magnitudes when they determine weights and measures.
>>
Let's put it this way: Countries should take the preferences of their consumers into account when determining the allowable units and their magnitudes.

<<
Bud, either you run a small stall in your spare time and you rip customers off whenever you can or you are totally gullible. What more can I say?
>>

Exactly right, Martin. I sell lemonade by the kodfsed and hamburgers by the pospelem. Consumers flock to my stall in large numbers even though they have no idea what these units mean. American consumers love to be ripped off. That is why they are attracted to places that use units they don't understand, and laws are necessary to make sure that no one takes advantage of them.

<<Let's put it this way: Countries should take the preferences of their consumers into account when determining the allowable units and their magnitudes. >>

Given the number of Minutemen at the store with muskets trying to start a revolution over 2 L soda bottles, perhaps the majority don't have very strong preferences or are willing to change if metric is better for the economy or their kids futures.

Small percentages have strong feelings at both ends of the spectrum. Most in the middle would simply prefer that it go one way or the other and not continue to drag on.

John, you are right in a way. It is not on the list of top priorities for most voters, which is why the government gets away with ignoring them. But opinion polls have been taken in Britain, and probably in the US also, that show that customary is preferred. The government can't simply say "well, we know you aren't going to do anything about it, so we'll just ignore you."
Actually, maybe they can.