The woodsure scheme, do we need it?

[Rob_the_Sparky]

Does this scheme prevent the delivery of arb waste or is it only relevant if the wood is in ready to burn sized chunks?  I'm interested as most of the wood I burn is delivered this way but supply seems a bit thin this year.

[openspaceman]

38 minutes ago, Rob_the_Sparky said:

Does this scheme prevent the delivery of arb waste or is it only relevant if the wood is in ready to burn sized chunks?  I'm interested as most of the wood I burn is delivered this way but supply seems a bit thin this year.

It's an interesting one in that it seems to be all encompassing as it says

 

"for the purposes of combustion in domestic premises in England;"

 

so that it is in a raw form makes no difference.

 

but the real ambiguous bit is

 

"a person supplies a relevant solid fuel if the person supplies such a fuel by way of sale from or by means of—"

 

which I think means money must change hands, or is it any supply?

[Peasgood]

Pretty sure a lot of it is down to the trendies within the M25 burning window frames and fence panels in their log burners causing excess air particles as a result.

[Gav73]

 
"a person supplies a relevant solid fuel if the person supplies such a fuel by way of sale from or by means of—"
 

It’s typical of any legislation, vague enough to cover all the angles they might want it too, but not specific enough so everyone knows exactly where they stand!

It reminds me of a local genius who got round the alcohol licensing by selling crisps from an old ice cream - you’d call his number and he’d come over to sell you a bag of crisps for £5 and you got 4 cans free.

He traded for a number of years, much to the annoyance of the licensing guys, until the legislation was changed to the current vague version.

[nepia]

3 hours ago, openspaceman said:

"a person supplies a relevant solid fuel if the person supplies such a fuel by way of sale from or by means of—"

 

which I think means money must change hands, or is it any supply?

'by way of sale' I wouldn't see as ambiguous; it surely has to mean in exchange for money or money's worth

[Gav73]

'by way of sale' I wouldn't see as ambiguous; it surely has to mean in exchange for money or money's worth

The money’s worth is where it can be a little iffy, as it can be interpreted in different ways.

A sale is a “transfer of something (and title to it) in return for money (or other thing of value)”

In the case of arb waste, the “money’s worth” is the “other thing of value”. Generally waste costs money to dispose of, so it could be construed that by providing arb waste for free, the arborist is gaining the value of not paying for disposal.

Now I don’t believe it would fall under the scheme, all of my firewood is arb waste, so I hope it doesn’t, but it is a good example of how legislation can be a headache and open to interpretation.

[nepia]

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).

 

In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

[Gav73]

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).
 
In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

What you’ve just said kind of proves the point I was making. You’re reading it one way, I’m suggesting it could be read another way. I don’t think either of us is right or wrong, it’s just a typical example of legislation not being straightforward.

When it come to enforcing the legislation, none of us know how the legislation could be interpreted and used, and until that happens everyone will have to make their best guess on what’s right and wrong.

[openspaceman]

27 minutes ago, nepia said:

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).

 

In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

It's funny you came up with that one as I was thinking @kevinjohnsonmbe had a problem along these lines, perhaps it was supplying himself with firewood which HMRC wanted to tax as a benefit in kind?

[Big J]

Tom D said to me about 13 odd years ago - "selling firewood is selling the unprofitable to the ungrateful"

 

I'd added to that - "selling firewood is selling the unprofitable to the uneducated and ungrateful"

 

To which you can now add "selling firewood is selling the unprofitable to the uneducated and ungrateful through an ill conceived and poorly implemented government cartel"

 

I take my hat off to any of you who have jumped through the hoops to comply. It's patently bollocks and is designed to force out the smaller producers. 

 

The responsibility for burning firewood that is dry shouldn't lie with the retailer. The retailer has no control over what the consumer does after it's delivered. It could be a crispy 10% MC after being baked in a kiln when tipped but a customer leaving it out overnight in the rain will result in it exceeding 20%.

 

Supermarkets sell food that is in date and fit for consumption. It's the consumer's responsibility to ensure that they eat it when it is fresh. The Woodsure scheme punishing firewood retailers for customers using wet wood is like fining supermarkets for customers eating out of date food. 

 

Education of the consumer is the key, but I think it's a exercise in futility. I had to explain to a lady on the Brits in Sweden page on Facebook (so you'd think they'd be a little more clued up) that no, burning pine isn't going to tar up your chimney. She was quite adamant.