Government consultation on Copyright & Anti Competition

The Government’s consultation on copyright, addressed the regulatory impact and costs to business of the proposals to impose statutory codes on collective licensing societies, and to introduce new exceptions.

The initial assessments will be reviewed in the light of evidence collected during the consultation process. SBID participated in this process and is pro-active in the Government’s continuing research programme. The consultation published in December 2011 was accompanied by a set of initial impact assessments; the public outcome to date is available from the Intellectual Property Office website.

Great British companies such as British Airways, Shell, Unilever, the Co-op, Tesco, and Balfour Beatty have been investigated over several years for alleged price fixing, fined nearly a quarter of a billion pounds by the OFT, only for each case to collapse because there was no basis in fact, law or economics to support them. The net result is a huge bill for the taxpayer to pay the legal fees. There are 600 employees at the OFT costing us £60 million per annum, let alone compensation to the companies that have been improperly charged so a review is very much needed.

Last year, the Government consulted on proposals to reform the competition regime including merging the Office of Fair Trading and the Competition Commission to create a single Competition and Markets Authority. Among other things, the consultation sought views on proposals to improve the enforcement of the anti-trust prohibitions. The Government will announce their conclusions following the consultation shortly.

One reason why the review looked at merging the Office of Fair Trading and the Competition Commission is to make sure that they are right and fit for purpose for our times and that there are the right resources needed for the world that we live in today. There is no doubt about it that the Office of Fair Trading has had a wonderful reputation in the past, and we would like to think that the new merger, if it goes forward, will take forward the very best of the OFT and the very best of the Competition Commission.

The Government’s aims is to build on the best of the OFT and the best of the Competition Commission in the creation of a world-leading Competition and Markets Authority. The Government recognise that the system for the enforcement of the anti-trust prohibitions is not working as well as it should. Cases take too long and a strong challenge to decisions is often mounted on appeal. It is worth remembering that Britain has a reputation in the world as being one of the best places in which markets work. They are open and fair. We have to make sure that we have timely and effective enforcement. That is what the consultation has been about.

The government Ministry for Fair Trade agrees that whatever reorganisation of the competition authorities is to take place in the future, adequate resources must be made available to ensure that there is effective combating of price-fixing cartels and other anti-competitive practices. The record shows that, on the matter of liability as distinct from the precise amount of penalty, the OFT has been upset on appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal only relatively rarely. It has admittedly been told by the Competition Appeal Tribunal that the amount of penalty is sometimes too large and has been reduced. Last year, and I think the year before, the OFT brought in some £60 million to the Exchequer from fines. Fines that had been upheld by the Competition Appeal Tribunal! SBID has been actively involved in the programme to review and reform faults in the current system of interior design and propose methods for improvement over the past three years. The SBID report has been submitted.

The Office of Fair Trading is of course an independent body and is best placed to balance the work that it does; it is not the Government’s place to tell it what to do. However, it is almost impossible for the ordinary consumer trying to deal with the combination of the OFT, Consumer Focus, Consumer Direct, the CBA and the Competition Commission to know where to go when there is an issue and this requires further clarity.

With the restructuring coming, the department must decide where change will take place. It will shortly put some real clarity on its website to direct people under the current structure and with some clear indication where restructuring is going to take us.

The Government will reveal their conclusion in the next few weeks after the finalisation of the consultation…… watch here!

Vanessa Brady comments on SBID’s latest campaign, the Fair Trading Policy in Interior Design. © Copyright SBID 2012

Trade discount is for trade, not retail, and mixing the two is unfair to all parties. The SBID Fair Trading Policy does not recommend, support or promote passing on trade discounts to the public.

Historically some interior decorators and designers passed on their trade price to potential clients to obtain work. That is desperation, not a design commission. Such designers and decorators cause mass damage to the overall industry: they undermine the retailers’ position and they betray the supplier’s price structuring integrity. In doing so, they create grey billing procedures where the customer is unable to breakdown an invoice costs and assumes inflated pricing, leading to disputes. In addition, a lack of transparency on fees, discounts and project fee structuring has often prevented potential clients from seeking professional design advice at all.

Discover how SBID recommends interior design fees should be structured for best practice.

The common practice of designers passing trade discounts to their customers, i.e. the public, shrinks the development of interior design as a profession and ultimately costs each market sector profit and reputation. It is not surprising that those who trade in this practice are the largest sector in administration and bankruptcy. They are also the most boisterous when policies such as the SBID Fair Trading Policy are introduced. SBID’s aim in implementing the Fair Trading Policy is specifically to further separate hobbyists from professionals and, in doing so, raise the standards of the entire profession.

Practitioners who provide a design service free of charge undermine the overall design industry. It is neither appropriate nor financially sustainable for professionals to provide their key performance, their design knowledge and advice, free of charge. It is by charging a fee for the trained services of a professional designer, that a designer generates income.

Retail prices include the cost of stock and customer service. Trade prices are products supplied on business to business (B2B) terms by manufacturers, or professional industry partners (PIPs). Interior design has until now rarely respected the difference. Currently, two common unprofessional billing methods adopted by designers are:
1. Sharing trade prices as leverage to obtain projects;
2. Providing a free design service, creating income from ‘supplying goods’ only.

All too often a designer’s unrealistic recognition of project costs and random product supply between trade and retail-pricing generates customer complaints. This common practice is therefore a threat to the overall reputation and growth of the profession of design.

Other grey areas of passing on trade prices to one-time-purchasers make it impossible for retailers to compete fairly. Supplying goods has additional costs attached for different performances: retailers absorb costs such as showroom space, staffing, after-sales service and product training etc. which designers do not provide.

There is a clear additional cost in every sale a retailer makes when compared to the service provided by a designer. Designers may need to install, take delivery, organise returns of products, and so on, and this clearly has time (and cost) attached. Therefore the fee a designer earns in a trade price reflects some of the services the designer performs.

Under the SBID Fair Trading Policy, a clear charging system sets out procedures for other services such as sourcing and supplying products. SBID design professionals are encouraged to be transparent about rates for hourly, daily and project billing fees in their terms of engagement.

The policy supports SBID Designers and PIPs* and provides a fair, equitable industry plan for growth. Registered SBID international industry body members are supported by the policy to promote qualified services, however the policy does not advise, direct or propose what a fee rate should be.
*PIPs – Professional Industry Partner

About SBID

– SBID was formed in March 2009 meeting the European Councils entry criteria for Interior Designers and Architects and was inducted into the European Council of Interior Architects (ECIA) in September 2009.

– Until 2009, Britain remained unqualified to meet the eighteen year old EU standards in interior design

– The sixteen page Intellectual Property owned document* formed the basis of the registration of SBID under British Law and part of the terms of membership of the European Council of Interior Architects (ECIA)

– Andrew Rolfe is one of Britain’s leading (top 100) contract lawyers, a member of the SBID Advisory Board and partner of Clifford Chance law firm.
*The sixteen page business prospectus is the intellectual property and copyright of Vanessa         Brady and Andrew Rolfe; its joint creators. It may not be reproduced without written authority from its joint creators.

– The SBID Fair Trading Policy is part of a joined up business plan that creates the bases of a design professional through education, practice and control with the aim of protecting the consumer and improving the professional image and performance of design professionals.- SBID is a Professional body raising, promoting and setting standards to create opportunities for design professionals to trade pan-industry providing design advice products and support services. The SBID Fair Trading Policy supports and builds on the relationship between these market sectors to create a clear route to market for the professional sector of design. The outcome will be a joined-up industry.

British bespoke bed-maker and acclaimed SBID member, Vi-Spring, has become the first UK bed-maker to be awarded the Woolmark for its luxurious collection of all-wool beds.  Made using 100 per cent wool – from fillings to upholstery – Vi-Spring’s Shetland Collection is the first of its kind, with exclusive use of real Shetland wool; a naturally soft, warm and sustainable fibre.

Recognised around the world, the respected Woolmark is synonymous with quality and guaranteed wool content. Vi-Spring’s luxury all-wool range, The Shetland Collection, underwent rigorous independent testing to comply with the Woolmark’s quality and performance criteria.

Vi-Spring’s Shetland Superb with Wool Sovereign divan

Each and every bed is handcrafted in Vi-Spring’s Devon workshop using the finest mix of real Shetland wool and pure Platinum Certified British Fleece Wool and finished with hand-tied woollen tufts. A selection is available of the highest quality all-wool fabrics to cover divan base and headboard to create a stand out look in the bedroom.

A planet friendly fibre, wool is uniquely suited to bed-making thanks to its natural softness, warmth and durability. It is an effective insulator and works to keep you cool in the summer, warm in the winter, and to draw moisture away from the body before releasing it into the air, ensuring a clean, fresh and hypoallergenic sleeping surface. Wool is also naturally resistant to dust mites, making a perfect choice for allergy sufferers.

Vi-Spring is proud to promote the Woolmark with The Shetland Collection, which includes the Shetland and Shetland Superb (as well as the Gatcombe and Marrister bedstead mattress, which are exclusive to John Lewis). Vi-Spring is also a keen supporter of the Campaign for Wool, which is committed to preserving Britain’s precious wool industry.

An interesting and important discussion is being launched here by kitchen design expert and SBID member Darren Morgan. This blog appeared in Modenus, one of SBID’s media partner for which Darren contributes regularly. Please feel free to leave a comment below. For more information about Darren, his work as a kitchen designer, writer and speaker, please contact him through his website.

‘I, like many, understand the power of hope and the bitterness of disappointment.  The everyday exchanges that make up our lives are potentially loaded with both these emotions.  But no matter how proactive we are in trying to protect our hope from disappointment, inevitably sometimes our valiant efforts are unsuccessful!

The funny thing about hope is that you only experience it when looking forward while disappointment always occurs in the present or past.  It therefore seems appropriate as we look back at 2011 to consider the impact of both disappointment and hope upon the kitchen industry.

It is true that one of the main disappointments of 2011 has been the inability to shake off the global debt crisis which has not only hung around like a bad smell but has decided to act like an evil hobgoblin and dig its claws deeper into an industry that is reeling from an uncertain Euro zone.  This uncertainty has stifled opportunities; well any that involves spending money, and even if corporate cash has been spent, those responsible for signing the cheque may well decide to change their mind as uncertain financial fear spreads like a disease.  There have been one or two high profile companies who have decided to rethink their investment lately with Indesit deciding to abandon visionary plans for Scholtès UK and Lechner deciding to consolidate their efforts as opposed to spreading them wider.

But sometimes the darkness of disappointment can encourage us to look for the light of hope in places and ways we never imagined.  Adaptation in the face of adversity is a basic human evolutionary principle that can be applied to our lives and our work. Although these shock disappointments cause further uncertainty and fear they also create gaps and market opportunities for other brands.

Because of wider economic pressures and disappointments the kitchen industry is now undergoing a pubescent change.  Gone are the good old days where companies could have it how they liked, acting like spoiled kids who didn’t need to adapt or change.  The kitchen industry is currently undergoing a period of introverted reflection and beginning to appreciate core values which will make it stronger in the future.  And this new found maturity is certainly offering hope.

With less money around in the economy the kitchen industry is now driven by a clear need to deliver stylish value.  And this determination brings with it better products, better service and better design.  We are currently in the process of redefining the evolutionary path of kitchen design and therefore the industry as we know it.

Technology is driving the change with manufacturers using it to increase efficiency and market share.  The products delivered by the flamboyant research and development budgets of the past are now being reconsidered, adapted and transformed in order to make them better and more cost effective.  This is particularly evident in the production of laminate materials where choices and design options have bounded forward giving designers a cost effective alternative material to work with.  The change in market conditions may also see a long term re-investment in Western industry as Eastern manufacturing regions like China may not seem as economically appealing to large scale producers.

For years kitchen designers have been seen as a consequential by-product of kitchen sales but now design is finally being accepted as a fundamental part of the process.  2011 has seen a surge in the number of associations and groups focused on the promotion of kitchen design as an important and influential discipline.  Although it is disappointing that these groups appear to have different approaches and objectives, their very existence does provide hope for the future, encouraging new talent to get involved and changing the public perception of the lowly kitchen designer.

Because of the new importance given to kitchen design as a facilitator of sales software companies are investing heavily in order to make their products better.  A major hope for the future is that 3D technology will begin to redefine the interface between retailer and consumer allowing designers creativity to flourish and consumers understanding to grow.  The advancements in 3D technology will not  involve standing in a showroom wearing funny glasses either as the technology already exists to experience 3D without them.  Clients will experience kitchen design in an augmented virtual reality where they can use online resources and Apps to create photorealistic visions of their future space.

Imagine using your iPad as a window into the future, allowing you to stand in a pre-fitted architectural space and appreciate the post installed results.  Simply by moving and rotating the iPad you will be able to see what your new kitchen will look like before it is even made.  These advancements may well impact the current retail model with showrooms becoming smaller and in some cases, virtual spaces!  The reality of remote showroom accessibility and newly “qualified” kitchen designers acting as design and product translators may well be just around the corner!  Who said change wasn’t exciting!

Every cloud has a silver lining and every problem has a solution so don’t let the industry failings and disappointments of the past 12 months dampen your hopes for wp-content/2012.  If you are inventive, passionate and persistent your hopes for wp-content/2012 could deliver your best year yet!’

With a new year comes new resolutions and observations. Vanessa Brady, SBID President, gives us her guide to the British Design Industry…

“Britain is a funny place.  It is admired worldwide for innovation and great design, and revered as the land of great ideas and inventors. We just have to take a short trip abroad to see the unequalled level of respect which our design industry commands. Of course, being British, we don’t believe in such opinions of each other, rather having a tendency to damage success, especially if it is recognised in our peers. I have always admired the American philosophy to credit good results. These damaging British rivalries must stop for the betterment of the profession.

In 2012 SBID aims to stamp out this negative elbow positioning and propaganda spreading.  It is bad practice and, if challenged, also breaches legislation. We have collated evidence of anti-competition by a group of third parties over a lengthened period within the broad design industry. Those involved have collectively aimed to create a barrier of entry for SBID to trade freely, in breach of the Anti-Competition Act 1998, the Enterprise Act 2002 and the Office of Fair Trading regulator.

So this year we start with a clean slate, with a busy events calendar and an ever-growing membership of key industry leaders. SBID announces the International Interior Design Awards wp-content/2012, split into Residential and Contract sectors and hosted at two destinations in Italy; Macef (Milan) in September and SIA Guest (Rimini) in November. If last year’s entries are any guide, as is the profile of the judges we secured – including Professor Jimmy Choo OBE, – this year will be even better.

Being a British organisation with numerous international members, we realize that the most important aspect of British design is trust. When people see ‘Made in Britain’ emblazoned on a product, they are instantly reassured that the product has been critically assessed in every detail, analysed by numerous bodies and regulators for performance and longevity, and tested for safety and the validity of manufacturers’ claims. All these steps are necessary in order to produce evidence before a product receives certification.

If a product claims a ten year performance guarantee, it must first pass stringent durability, performance and safety tests. Testing is performed by our collaborating partner the British Standards Institute (BSI), amongst other organisations. Product designers for manufacturers understand interior design and interior decorating. They have to: the rigorous testing process is expensive and time-consuming, and many products don’t pass. In bathroom safety for example, water flow pressures for taps are graded; this measurement, among other factors, prevents flooding in multi-occupied buildings for water flow rates etc., and anti-slip tile surfaces prevent accidents when surfaces are wet.

Suitability of performance environments such as bathrooms, swimming pools or shopping centres carry different risks and are graded for their purpose. These criteria affect all products i.e. fabric and plastic coatings for fire safety, rub rating for wearability of upholstery in contract use, the location of carpet within a building for wearability.

These British design standards are not acknowledged or promoted sufficiently by designers to their clients. When products are correctly specified and installed, a designer has delivered a professional project. British design is built on trained designers and performance-tested products by quality brands. Great design is represented by educated designers (recognised through an accredited third party system, the SBID being only British destination with a standard which meets the European Council standard for practitioners) and reliable quality in products. Standards are credible performance indicators unrecognised as added value by designers, although they are in fact the cornerstone of an interior designer’s brief. Designers sell ideas and advice.

We are no longer in business just in the UK; as a member of the European Union, we must trade with equal opportunity and legislation with our European counterparts.  However we are of course still British, and we must not lose sight of the fact that our best selling assets are British quality, trust in performance and reliability in Europe and beyond.”

Major furniture company and SBID PIP Gloster is proud to receive the acclaimed label “Interior Innovation Award – Winner” for two of its new outdoor collections: NOMAD & ASTA.

Funky, Cool and colourful – this is the motto of these stylish collections, embodying the current trends of relaxed lifestyles and informal socialising.

Removable and easily replaceable, multicoloured covers are central to both Nomad and Asta collections – adding an environmentally friendly twist to their stylish themes: Want to update that out-door space? A simple facelift is easily achieved… just add new covers instead of purchasing completely new garden furniture.

The Interior Innovation Award organised by the German Design Council was launched in 2002 by IMM Cologne and is recognised as one of the most prestigious awards of the furnishing sector world-wide.

Want to see for yourself? The award winning products will be on display in a special exhibition of the Interior Innovation Award wp-content/2012 during the trade exhibition IMM Cologne wp-content/2012 and Living Interiors. Additionally, both products are automatically entered for “Interior Innovation Award – Best of Best wp-content/2012” due to be selected at the awards ceremony during the 16th January wp-content/2012 in the “Alter Wartesaal”, Cologne. Gloster are hoping for the big win!

More information here: www.interior-innovation-award.com

November has come and gone and with it the 61st remarkable edition of Italy’s internationally recognised hospitality exhibition, SIA Guest. Officially partnered with the Society of British Interior Design (SBID), the exhibition once again offered a hub for top-tier manufacturers, service providers and designers, both Italian and foreign, operating in the hospitality market.

SIA Guest, organized by Rimini Fiera S.P.A. at the Rimini Expo Centre fair ground in Italy, took place on 26-29 November 2011 and focused on business and excellence in innovation, attracting 600 exhibiting firms and more than 37,000 professional trade visitors from 30 different countries. A stand was provided for the Society in the TREND hall to promote its hard work towards better standards in the industry, and the benefits of membership for international manufacturers and designers. Fittingly, SIA Trend is a new hall in which a business area and cultural exhibition are combined, under the banner of experimentation for hotels and collective venues.

The Society took this opportunity to officially announce that it will be hosting the SBID International Design Awards wp-content/2012 at SIA Guest next year, with a focus on contract interior design. The competition will be open from December.

A hand-picked delegation of SBID’s top interior designers and architects was invited to attend the exhibition, meet the best international manufacturers on a one-to-one basis and participate in broader networking events, with a complementary 5-star hotel stay at i-Suite.

The British delegation was impressed by the unique mix of innovation and trends showcased: alongside the products of leading firms in the sectors of contract furnishings (china, glassware, silverware, table linens, bed linens), interdeco’ (fabrics, flooring, carpets and interior décor accessories), food service equipment, technology and illumination, safety, bathroom, wellness and fitness.

The 60,000m² of exhibit space offered a series of special displays, workshops, demos and conferences which completed the agenda. Exhibitors were given a chance to meet a qualified, select public thanks to b2b meetings and new formats that attracted buyers from major markets. The setting made for stimulating and fruitful encounters between supply and demand.

With a unique mix of innovation, trends, atmosphere, and conferences, the hospitality trade show is a not-to-be missed annual date for hospitality sector professionals – book early or become an SBID member to join the free annual delegation.

Interior Designers have regularly been regarded as untrained in business acumen, often quite justifiably but often it is due to third party suppliers taking designers deposits and then going bankrupt, leaving the designer without the product and having spent the client’s money.

Edward Davey, the Minister for Employment Relations, has launched a consultation about bankruptcy and company winding up. The consultation document sets out detailed proposals to reform the application process for bankruptcy and compulsory winding up by replacing the current court route with a new administrative process.

Uncontested applications would be determined by an adjudicator and the court would be involved only at the application stage to the extent that there is a dispute that can be resolved only by judicial intervention. The minister proposes to allow electronic applications to be made to an adjudicator, who will be a person appointed for that purpose by the Secretary of State and whose office would be within the Insolvency Service.

Debtors who want to apply for bankruptcy for themselves would have the choice of submitting electronic or paper applications, and the option of making the requisite payment to enter the process by instalments. Where creditors are looking to instigate proceedings, a new mandatory pre-action process would incentivise debtors and creditors to communicate with each other and thereby reach a mutually satisfactory solution to the debt problem without recourse to a bankruptcy or winding up application.

This reflects the government desire that people are empowered to make the right decisions for themselves about their finances, as set out in the government response to the call for evidence about personal insolvency.

Litigation can be costly and time consuming. This new process should therefore deliver a more efficient service as well as saving valuable public and private resources. In order to ensure that the interests of both debtors and creditors are protected, the court would still have an important role and the route through the courts will of course remain as an independant solution of resolve. Not only would it decide the outcome of disputes, but certain petitions for the winding up of companies, such as those based on public interest grounds, would continue to be determined by the courts.

We intend actively to engage with interested parties throughout the consultation period, and welcome views on whether the proposals will deliver a workable and efficient application process for bankruptcy and most compulsory windings up.