A poultry farmer from Somerset must pay over £50,000 after admitting to falsifying salmonella testing certificates.
Stuart Perkins, 38, of SG Perkins Ltd, from Radstock, was handed the significant fine at Bath Magistrates Court on July 3.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) reported finding traceability issues and that Perkins had provided false salmonella testing certificates.
MORE NEWS | Emissions reductions off track in England
MORE NEWS | Farmers at risk of bluetongue urged to join research
This resulted in birds being processed for food without confirmation they were free of disease.
The FSA intervened to mitigate the potential food safety risk by removing products with traceability issues from the market.
The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) helped the investigations by monitoring poultry welfare on site and collecting official Salmonella samples.
Perkins admitted to several violations under the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013 and the Animal Health Act 1981.
He received a fine of £5,000 for each FSA offence, £3,500 for each local authority offence, with additional costs of £21,810, and a victim surcharge of £2,000, totalling £50,830.
Andrew Quinn, head of the FSA's National Food Crime Unit, praised the hefty fine, stating it highlights the gravity of document falsification and endangering food safety.
"This should act as a deterrent to anyone considering taking dangerous short cuts and breaching food safety and hygiene law." he remarked.
“Together, we are stronger in the fight against food crime, and we continue to work with partners to ensure food is safe and help ensure that consumers are protected.”
Fakir Mohamed Osman of South West Trading Standards Service, emphasised the serious view authorities take on such breaches.
“The prevention of salmonella programme is there for a reason, to safeguard the public. Producers suspected of not carrying out the required testing will be investigated.”
He added: “The defendant’s actions posed a significant public health risk, and I am pleased that, through our joint efforts with the Food Standards Agency, we were able to take action.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here