This was identified at an inspection giving rise to a 100% penalty; however, this was reduced to a 20% penalty after the Department of Agriculture accepted it was the explanation. / Donal O' Leary
ADVERTISEMENT
A farmer had their appeal against a penalty for inadequate record keeping partially allowed due to a clerical error which occurred at the farmer’s vet.
The error by the veterinary practice incorrectly allocated a prohibited substance to the organic farmer and was transcribed into the farmer’s records. This was identified at an inspection, giving rise to a 100% penalty.
However, this was reduced to a 20% penalty after the Department of Agriculture accepted the explanation of the error.
ADVERTISEMENT
The farmer argued that the 20% penalty was extreme in the context of an error made by an external service provider.
The hearing found there was no evidence to suggest a general carelessness by the farmer in the keeping of records nor that the integrity of the organic product was in any way impacted.
The appeals officer said the error should be recategorised as a level one minor non-compliance.
Register for free to read this story and our free stories.
This content is available to digital subscribers and loyalty code users only. Sign in to your account, use the code or subscribe to get unlimited access.
The reader loyalty code gives you full access to the site from when you enter it until the following Wednesday at 9pm. Find your unique code on the back page of Irish Country Living every week.
CODE ACCEPTED
You have full access to the site until next Wednesday at 9pm.
CODE NOT VALID
Please try again or contact support.
A farmer had their appeal against a penalty for inadequate record keeping partially allowed due to a clerical error which occurred at the farmer’s vet.
The error by the veterinary practice incorrectly allocated a prohibited substance to the organic farmer and was transcribed into the farmer’s records. This was identified at an inspection, giving rise to a 100% penalty.
However, this was reduced to a 20% penalty after the Department of Agriculture accepted the explanation of the error.
The farmer argued that the 20% penalty was extreme in the context of an error made by an external service provider.
The hearing found there was no evidence to suggest a general carelessness by the farmer in the keeping of records nor that the integrity of the organic product was in any way impacted.
The appeals officer said the error should be recategorised as a level one minor non-compliance.
If you would like to speak to a member of our team, please call us on 01-4199525.
Link sent to your email address
We have sent an email to your address. Please click on the link in this email to reset your password. If you can't find it in your inbox, please check your spam folder. If you can't find the email, please call us on 01-4199525.
ENTER YOUR LOYALTY CODE:
The reader loyalty code gives you full access to the site from when you enter it until the following Wednesday at 9pm. Find your unique code on the back page of Irish Country Living every week.
SHARING OPTIONS