Wine company hit by 70,000 fine under recycling regulations

London firm Bibendum claims a turnover in the region of £100 million a year, but from 1998 until 2005 did not register as a packaging producer, and did not contribute towards national packaging producers' recycling targets being met.

The company pleaded guilty to the offences at Hendon Magistrates Court last week.

The Environment Agency had calculated that the firm had saved £55,000 by not paying for the recycling of packaging waste since producer responsibility regulations came into force.

Under the regulations, all companies using more than 50 tonnes of packaging each year to sell their goods – and which have a £2 million turnover or more – must contribute towards national recycling targets. They do this by registering with the Agency and buying evidence of packaging waste recycling – called packaging waste recovery notes (PRNs).

The Agency said Bibendum should have purchased 1,370 tonnes' worth of PRNs. The court fine reflected the amount of money the company saved by not buying its PRNs, as well as a £15,000 additional fine.

The magistrates also ordered the company to pay £2,000 in costs to the Environment Agency and to pay compensation of £6,836 to the Environment Agency for the lost registration fees.

Checks

Regents Park Road based Bibendum was caught out by the Agency in routine checks, and after two reminders in March 2006 it did sign up to a producer compliance scheme – Tag Pak – which purchases PRNs on behalf of its members to meet their producer responsibility obligations.

The Agency said the company had fully co-operated throughout the investigation, and also recycles waste through a local authority scheme, with plans to reduce the volume and impact of its glass waste.

Agency spokesperson Jacqueline Anthony said: “We are grateful to Bibendum Ltd for their cooperation with our investigations and the steps they took to ensure future compliance with the regulations.

“However, the money raised from compliance with this legislation goes directly to the recycling industry. The failure by this company to ensure they met their responsibilities means that over these years there was less investment in the recycling industry than there should have been.”