ASK ROCIO: I BOUGHT FAKE GOODS – WHY IS IT AN UPHILL BATTLE AGAINST THE COUNTERFEIT CROOKS?

Dear Rocio,

I bought online a gift which I now know is counterfeit. My local trading standards department seem reluctant to pursue it. How do I and other consumers fight back against the flood of fake goods?

Name and address supplied

Rocio says: Glencairn Crystal is a business worth raising a toast to. Established in 1981, the family-run firm based in East Kilbride has grown to become one of the largest manufacturers of whisky glasses in the world. The designs have a 3D trademark for the shape of the glass, giving its product a distinct look. 

So distinct, in fact, that manufacturers from around the world attempt imitations. And here is where the celebrations can be put on ice. So often is Glencairn’s trademark violated, the business now spends an inordinate amount of time and money trying to get these counterfeits taken down from online marketplaces.

Legal fees can swell to hundreds of thousands a year, and it can take years to bring companies to court. Time and again, by the time Glencairn has managed to get fake products taken down, the damage has already been done – customers have bought dupes and unscrupulous retailers have made money off the back of their workmanship.

Glencairn is by no means an isolated case. The issue of retailers, often based overseas in countries such as China, mimicking other brands’ products is widespread. Which? has spoken to several firms that spend time every day monitoring whether their products are being duped and sold at their expense.

Small firms – the backbone of the British economy – that should be spending money to reinvest in their businesses are instead having to divert resources to fight for their product’s reputation.

On the frontline against fighting counterfeit products are trading standards services. These teams across the country are responsible for enforcing consumer protection laws.

But as Which?’s Freedom of Information (FOI) request has laid bare, counterfeit goods and other crimes, such as scams, are not always being investigated in many parts of the UK because they are being deprioritised by trading standards teams with limited resources.

When our researchers asked all 187 trading standards teams in England, Scotland and Wales, we found dramatically varying resources across their services, and a number of teams deprioritising key areas of their remit, which could leave both consumers and businesses exposed to a greater risk of harm. Some trading standards teams in the country have fewer than one member of staff per 100,000 people.

For instance, 19 councils across the country said they didn’t carry out any routine inspections of businesses in the last financial year. Forty-five councils deprioritised proactive surveillance such as planned test purchases; 25 councils deprioritised intellectual property theft or counterfeit goods; 24 councils cut back on checking that businesses are not short-changing customers on the size of products or servings (known as weights and measures); and eight deprioritised investigating scams.

There is currently no public Government data on the performance levels of local trading standards teams, meaning little accountability and oversight over the way our consumer enforcement system operates at a local level – despite the work of these teams having national consequences. The Which? FOI request shows that many of these services are under enormous strain.

Cash-strapped consumers still battling the high cost of living may be tempted to buy mimics of expensive products, such as Dyson airwrap hairdryers, but could be left paying the price when these dupes fail because they aren’t held to the same high standards as the originals. Suffolk Trading Standards reported intercepting 500 dupes last year that were deemed an electric shock and fire risk – but more are likely to be slipping through the net.

Clearly, this isn’t sustainable. Serious and urgent reform is needed. We want the government to restructure the consumer enforcement system, with a greater focus on its effectiveness, how well it uses intelligence and shares services, and with greater oversight and accountability to ensure a risk-based approach.

2025-05-09T19:49:08Z