The new recycling system

Qualyfing containers are clearly defined in all re-turns literature.

Again because it is the law.

4) The refundable nature of the deposit shall be made clear to the consumer in all material promoting the scheme and all points of sale.

And as the CEO reiterated on national television Monday night, No Logo - No Deposit.

measures to be undertaken by the body concerned relating to the dissemination of information to the public regarding the Deposit Return Scheme

😂

They have shifted the goal posts, which by my reading may not actual be legal.

Well then. The shop are in breach by your strict interpretation. An an inscope product does not include the logo in the definition by law.

Do you accept ReTurn have the power to audit?

Again, nothing I’ve said is untrue. I’ve now provided you the law.

13. (1) A producer shall not place in-scope products on the market unless he or she is a member of an approved body.

(2) A producer will pay the deposit to an approved body for the in-scope products they place on the market at the point when they place them on the market.

(3) A producer shall charge a deposit on all in-scope products he or she places on the market in the State and provide the consumer with proof of payment of the deposit.

(4) A producer shall –

(a) register with an approved body,

(b) provide details to the approved body with whom they have registered of all in-scope products they place on the market,

(c) pay any registration and producer fee as required by the approved body,

(d) furnish information in connection with their participation in the Deposit Return Scheme, in such form and at such frequency as may be specified by the approved body with whom they are registered,

(e) label an in-scope product as prescribed by an approved body.

Oh dear, would appear forcing the producers to charge without a logo is also illegal.

What is the relevance of this? Are we talking about producers? No.

We’re talking about a retailer. That retailer is selling an inscope product without charging a deposit.

You literally cannot refute that.

Type the barcode in here:

https://re-turn.ie/consumer/

Logo or no logo it will be accepted. There are lots of products with no logo being sold without a deposit. These will be accepted by an RVM (irrespective of when they were bought)

That retailer is selling an inscope product without charging a deposit.

This isn't difficult, the producer cannot charge the deposit to the retailer without the logo.

(e) label an in-scope product as prescribed by an approved body

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2021/si/599/made/en/print

Ive linked you the law several times and pointed to exactly what they breach. Have you even clicked on the link?

Ensure a deposit is not charged on old non-deposit stock during the transition period

From Re-Turn

The shop were not charged the deposit but Return have stated they should still charge the deposit to the customer.

I know, but they are not legally obliged to, in fact they could be breaking the law if they do which is my point and the very point of one retailer who was on the radio made during the week.

Any store who charges a deposit on a product that is not clearly defined by the approved body.

No Logo - No Party.

You agreed with me last week when you stated several times it was illegal to charge the deposit without a logo.

But now it magically is.

😂

Another case of rising bin costs.

For some people, to control costs, they will cancel their green bin and use general waste for everything re-turn don't take. We are walking backwards.

That's a result!!

And boy do we need it.

A bit of good news in a day of confusion and recrimination.

(I'd still hold onto the receipt just in case 🙂)

With the greatest of respect; your idea would achieve nothing and probably earn you a nickname in the staff room. Speaking from experience working in a convenience store.

He probably is right.

It's a good thing to have nice staff in a local shop that you can pass the time of day with.

Like with Minimum Unit Pricing on Alcohol there is no viable protest with DRS.

All the parties in the Dail support DRS, it's up and running (we'll sort of stumbling TBH 🙂)

I can't see it going anywhere any time soon.

My approach is to try to make sure that every container I pay a deposit on is returned for refund.

you're still dodging everything i'm saying and giving no genuine answer.

So far you've linked some policies from return, a link saying difference between civil and criminal law, and then some irish law about the mandate of businuesses being told by law to register with return for the purposes of having/getting an RVM on their premises, or for an exemption if they meet the required criteria. i have clicked on all links you've sent me. none of them answer how they shop is guilty of anything, or shown how re-turn can pursue said shop in a court of law.

You made the claim that re-turn can "go after them" if they choose to, and claimed its risky on that grounds. Yet have still not said what charges. To make things easier for you and express your point directly, i have gave you the opportunity to pretend to be re-turn and myself being the shop, and asked you what laws am i being taken to court for breaking? what accusation of laws broken would be written on the summons or solicitor letter? like i said if theres no case/accusation of wrong doing there is no court case. You dont take people to court to find out if they broke the law. You take a person to court because they've broken the law.

if you are re-turn, how do you even find out what shop sold the can to the person who brought it back to an rvm and claimed the deposit on it when none was paid initially? do you just assume it musta been purchased from a local shop and audit them all? and how do you know the can was not robbed? infact how do you even know anything? how can you? machine crushes or shreds the cans it accepts. How do you know there was no logo on the can? there is clearly no basis established for any course of legal action and no risk of there being any. There's litrelly no case here for anything.

probebly because they don't want people putting in bottles/cans without a logo on them. the machines have this written on them. They only want the logo ones inserted which is hilerious. it would be against their best interests to make it more conviencnt for people to know which logo-less bottles and cans can be redeemed for a deposit, as a good chunk of them were sold BEFORE feb 1st meaning no deposit was initially paid on those logoless ones that made it through initially. it was only after jan 31st could shops charge a deposit on stuff