Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Red tractor traceability.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Drillman" data-source="post: 7848029" data-attributes="member: 403"><p>well considering we have paid the tractor to audit our products as assured and considering market options without there audit are limited, they should be ensuring that assurance that we have paid for makes it all the way to the consumer.</p><p></p><p>They should have robust procedures in places all along the food chain to protect our interests.</p><p></p><p>And to let our assured products be co-mingled with other non assured products therefore devaluing the quality mark that we have paid to be audited to achieve is a massive failure on there part and and they should be refunding us (for loss of that quality mark) </p><p></p><p>Charging the processor a fee to use the quality mark of our goods that have already been audited to have it on them I would also question the legality of!</p><p></p><p>So in summary</p><p></p><p>red tractor do the following:-</p><p></p><p>Charge us a fee to audit our products so we can sell with there assurance on it </p><p></p><p>but- </p><p></p><p>then do not ensure that our products (which we paid money to have a supposedly serious quality accreditation attached to them) make it it through the processing chain to the end user without losing that accreditation.</p><p></p><p>And also charge the processor for use of the quality mark that we as growers have already paid for to have attached to that product.</p><p></p><p>How can it even be legal for the above to happen?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Drillman, post: 7848029, member: 403"] well considering we have paid the tractor to audit our products as assured and considering market options without there audit are limited, they should be ensuring that assurance that we have paid for makes it all the way to the consumer. They should have robust procedures in places all along the food chain to protect our interests. And to let our assured products be co-mingled with other non assured products therefore devaluing the quality mark that we have paid to be audited to achieve is a massive failure on there part and and they should be refunding us (for loss of that quality mark) Charging the processor a fee to use the quality mark of our goods that have already been audited to have it on them I would also question the legality of! So in summary red tractor do the following:- Charge us a fee to audit our products so we can sell with there assurance on it but- then do not ensure that our products (which we paid money to have a supposedly serious quality accreditation attached to them) make it it through the processing chain to the end user without losing that accreditation. And also charge the processor for use of the quality mark that we as growers have already paid for to have attached to that product. How can it even be legal for the above to happen? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Red tractor traceability.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top