Cats & Pipes has issued a response following the conclusion of a case brought by DVSA over the mislabelling of a DPF.
In an initial Press Statement released on Tuesday, 23rd March, DVSA announced that the North Wales-based emissions parts company, Cats & Pipes, had been prosecuted for “supplying products that failed to meet the required environmental laws”. However, in a reissue of the statement today (26th March), DVSA has recalled this original wording.
As it transpires, the £6,000 fine, £4,000 costs and £170 surcharge fee to be paid by Cats & Pipes was for a conviction relating to the mislabelling of a single Diesel Particulate Filter. The unit itself is reportedly compliant.
DVSA’s Market Surveillance Unit (MSU) brought the case to Mold Magistrates Court, and after its conclusion on 16th March, MSU Senior Investigator Emma-Jane Morris said:
“Manufacturers and distributors must ensure their products meet the necessary standards and are correctly marked and approved for the vehicles or engine types they are intended for. Companies flouting the standards will face prosecution.
“This prosecution also acts as an important lesson for garages and others that fit parts to ask questions of distributors to make sure parts are legal.”
Cats & Pipes has issued a response to provide clarity to DVSA’s initial press release. Within the reply, Managing Director David Carpenter stated:
“As a company we have and always will take compliance and quality assurance extremely seriously. Our test facility is one of the best in Europe and we also operate a comprehensive Quality Assurance System which meets ISO 9001:2015.
“We were therefore disappointed when it came to light over two years ago that one of our products had left the production facility contrary to our quality procedures, without an indelibly marked part number.
“As the unit met all other environmental standards, we expected an external audit by DVSA of the Quality Assurance to ensure compliance and no further action. However, DVSA considered it preferable to proceed with a court case bringing four charges, three of which were dropped on the day of the trial and prior to the Judge’s deliberations.
“DVSA were also supplied with evidence of the fact that the company had already identified this issue and that steps had been put in place to ensure this oversight in process would not be repeated.
“The closing comments from the Judge puts this into perspective and as a company we feel disillusioned and wholly disappointed in the way this has been handled by personnel within the DVSA.”
