Pitfalls for tenants (From Gazette & Herald)

Pitfalls for tenants

IN the real world, farmers are being forced to diversify in order to survive and now we are told that over 50pc of farming income comes from non-traditional farming activities.

This is all very well for the owner-occupier who can make his own decisions, provided he stays within the planning and tax laws; but what about the tenant farmer who is subject to a written agreement which was perhaps drafted at a time when diversification was not a word found in the Oxford English Dictionary, which it wasn't 20 years ago?

There has been an interesting and far-reaching decision by the Court of Appeal in the inappropriately named Jewell Case.

The issue here was quite straight forward in that Robert Jewell, the tenant farmer, had created an open farm on his holding attracting visitors which provided him with over a third of his income.

As with most tenancies, his agreement had a covenant which required the holding "to be used for agricultural purposes only".

The landlords served a notice for breach of contract and the Court of Appeal upheld the notice in a robust judgement which reaffirmed the tenancy agreement meant what it said and that tourism and education did not fall within the definition of agriculture.

The implication for all tenant farms is, therefore, pretty serious and there is an urgent need to consider the activities on the farm in relation to their agricultural nature.

If a tenant is in breach of his agreement this can be remedied by getting the landlord's consent.

The situation may be serious enough to warrant advice and don't hesitate to take some.

EU ban on railway sleepers

Scientific advisory committees seem to breed like mushrooms in Brussels and yet another one with little else to do has reinvestigated the dangers of using creosote.

The scientists have now concluded that their previous views were too generous and that creosote, in however few parts per million, is a potential danger to the public.

Clearly creosote is to vanish from our farm workshops but so also will the ubiquitous railway sleeper which, after a useful life on the track, has been retired to a multiplicity of uses around the farm and garden.

As from June 30, they will no longer be available. It does appear pretty far fetched that a railway sleeper that has been exposed to the weather for the past 50 years can now prove to be a carcinogenic threat as a garden step or a gate post, but that is the barmy world that we live in.

Now, Railtrack will have to scratch its head as to what to do with the remaining thousands of railway sleepers yet to be taken up.

Thanks to my Ryton correspondents for researching this issue.

The great cattle paperchase

Roger Pearce, our IT specialist, has been down at a user-group forum with DEFRA and it is going to have a real assault on the millions of unsolved errors on the traceability system for cattle.

Its basic precept, which is very difficult to swallow, is that the current keeper of an animal is responsible for all previous mistakes and no payments will be made in respect of that animal until they are resolved. This means that if you buy a store beast, one which the original breeder, perhaps three owners ago, failed to record its off movement, then you, as the current keeper, will not be eligible for any subsidies.

As we have found out, the Rural Payments Agency is becoming increasingly assiduous in its apparent determination to pay out as little as possible and communication of any reasons for withholding any money is not its strong point.

Therefore, a small matter of £1.2m has been set aside to cover the cost of a bovine June census which will be coming out in the summer.

Every animal upon which a mistake or omission is found in its records will be listed laboriously and dispatched to the farming community for them to check and research the correct answer.

Currently, the paperwork extends to a mere ten pages but if you have any quantity of cattle you could be receiving 100 sheets of paper - lucky you!

The answers can be provided electronically, but at present the CTS software is being upgraded and is not up to the task!

At the same meeting, it was announced that funding for the BCMS at Workington was due to come to an end in March 2004 and that they were now seriously looking at ways of continuing, for example by making a charge for passports or for every movement registered.

The principle of passing the cost back to the farmer is to be expected, but we await with trepidation as to the quantum of the money.

It is interesting to note that in Scotland, where things are done differently, they have a staff of four in Inverness recording over 4m sheep movements each year. This contrasts poorly with the BCMS in Workington where 630 are employed!

We need a bit of rationalisation quickly.

This is nothing to do with agriculture, but for those avid devotees of the radio programme "Sorry I haven't a Clue" you will be delighted to hear they won an award.

Typically, Tim Brooke-Taylor dispensed with convention and said he was going to give the sponsors, Electrolux, a plug. Then he reminded his audience that Electrolux didn't really need any more plugs!

Beef payments withheld

There are a lot of beef farmers getting pretty angry at the appalling performance record of the Rural Payments Agency which admitted last week that nearly 100,000 claims for advance payments on 2002 subsidies were still outstanding. This is about 50pc of the total and the delay of five months is completely unacceptable.

The main reason given is that the computer software is not capable of processing claims where there have been any anomalies over what are termed "penalty animals".

Any reasonable person would have thought that in order to find out if you have a "penalty animal" then you just needed to ring up the RPA for the information; but that is not the way of the modern bureaucrat and you would be told that the RPA considers it a breach of its duty to release that information advising you that any further searches are your own responsibility.

Sid Craggs rang me last week to say that he had £5,000 held up due to a different set of bar codes being put onto various BCMS passports.

He couldn't find out the problem from RPA but he says that the BCMS will investigate the matter if it has a claim reference number.

Anyone in a similar situation can therefore obtain a reference number from RPA and pass that on to BCMS which will then apparently go back to RPA and get the information from you.

What a long, convoluted and totally unnecessary performance!

Market report

On Tuesday, March 18, forward were 83 cattle including 28 bulls and 2,290 sheep including 455 ewes.

Steers, light to 104p/kilo from L Thompson & Son, Ling Farm (ave 97.1p), heavy to 106p from C B Rivis, Hunmanby (99.2p).

Heifers, light to 109p from R Holtby, Leavening (103.1p), medium to 129p from D J Thomlinson, Sleightholmedale (102.2p), heavy to 140p from J O Barker, Snainton (101.2p).

Bulls, light to 110p from R Mason, Ling Hall (96.5p), heavy to 111p from R Mason (96.5p).

Black and white bulls to 86p from M Welford, Weaverthorpe (79.5p).

Hoggs, light to 125p from L R Wilson, Rudston (125p), standards to 139.1p from I Grice, Mount Pleasant (129.1p), medium to 138p from J Greenheld & Son, Rosedale (127.2p), heavy to 130.8p from M D Medd, Sawdon (120.76p), overweight to 121.1pk from P Clark, Farlington (111.8p).

Ewes to £96.50 from P Raines & Sons, Stonegrave (£67.03).

Updated: 10:47 Wednesday, March 19, 2003