Detention Of Food Notice

This glossary term is part of the SG Systems Global regulatory & operations guide library.

Updated January 2026 • UK Food Law Enforcement • detention notices, controlled holds, unsafe food suspicion, sampling and evidence preservation, chain of custody, movement restrictions, disposition outcomes, audit-ready records • Food & Feed Supply Chain (manufacturing, co-packers, cold stores, distributors, importers, retailers)

Detention of food notice is an enforcement tool used to prevent food from being moved, sold, or otherwise placed on the market while an authority investigates whether it is unsafe, misdescribed, or otherwise non-compliant. Operationally, a detention notice is a forced “hard hold” imposed from the outside. It shifts the business immediately into evidence mode: you must preserve product identity, lock movement, document custody, and produce defensible records that show what the detained product is, where it is, and what happened to it during the detention period.

This matters because detention is often the last controllable stage before escalation. If you can rapidly prove scope, preserve integrity, and cooperate with a clean evidence pack, detention may stay narrow and time-limited. If you can’t—if product locations drift, holds are porous, records are inconsistent, or the business keeps shipping related product—authorities may widen scope or escalate to seizure, condemnation, or prosecution. In other words, detention is where record quality and execution discipline directly determine commercial damage.

Tell it like it is: most companies treat detention like “a legal problem.” It’s primarily an operations control problem. The authority is testing whether your system can prevent movement and preserve evidence without improvisation. If your traceability depends on spreadsheets and verbal agreements, detention becomes chaotic—because chaos looks like loss of control, and loss of control drives escalation.

“A detention notice isn’t just ‘stop moving product.’ It’s ‘prove you can stop moving product—and prove what you stopped.’”

1) What a detention of food notice means operationally

A detention notice means a specific product (and often a defined lot/quantity/location) is legally restricted from movement. The organisation must treat detained stock as “non-shippable” regardless of customer pressure or production realities. Operationally, this requires two immediate capabilities:

• Containment: system-enforced holds that prevent picking, loading, and transfer
• Proof: a defensible record of what is detained, where it is, and how it is controlled

Tell it like it is: if you can’t produce proof quickly, you don’t control scope. Authorities will widen assumptions because they can’t trust your boundaries.

2) Typical triggers and why detention is issued

Detention is used when risk is suspected and the authority needs to prevent product movement while the facts are established. Common operational triggers include:

• Unsafe food suspicion (complaints, presumptive results, foreign body concerns)
• Mislabel/misdescription (allergen, identity, origin, date coding issues)
• Hygiene or process control failures that call product integrity into question
• Temperature/condition uncertainty where cold chain integrity cannot be proven
• Traceability gaps that prevent confident scoping or market withdrawal

Tell it like it is: detention is often the authority’s way of forcing a “stop” when your system can’t demonstrate it will stop on its own.

3) Scope map: what gets restricted and tested

Detention is not just “hold product.” It triggers a structured test of your control system: identity, location certainty, status enforcement, and evidence integrity.

The takeaway: detention tests your ability to keep truth stable while the investigation runs.

4) Freeze movement: how to contain without chaos

The first operational goal is containment. That means no picking, no loading, no transfers, no relabeling, and no “just move it to make space” behavior unless explicitly authorised and documented. Containment must be system-enforced and communicated clearly to operations, 3PLs, and customer-facing teams.

Practically, the containment playbook includes:

• Immediate status lock at item/lot/location level
• Shipment blocks at pick and load, not only at dispatch paperwork
• Controlled access to detained areas (physical + system permissions)
• Stop-the-line rules for any production that would consume or ship detained materials
• Change freeze on records that define scope (master data, label changes, rework)

Tell it like it is: the authority will judge you by whether product stayed put. If product moves during detention without evidence, you’ve handed them a reason to escalate.

5) Identity and location control: avoid “inventory drift”

Inventory drift is the silent failure mode of detention. It happens when detained stock is moved “for operations reasons” without a controlled event record, or when the system location doesn’t match physical reality. Once drift exists, your scope claims become untrustworthy.

Minimum identity discipline during detention:

• Verified counts and physical location confirmation at the start of detention
• Serialized handling units (pallet/tote IDs) where practical to preserve identity
• Controlled movements only with authorisation, timestamps, and custody proof
• Condition monitoring linked to the detained units and locations

Tell it like it is: if you can’t prove where the detained product is, you can’t credibly argue scope. That’s how narrow detentions become broad detentions.

6) Sampling and evidence preservation

Sampling often occurs during detention. Whether samples are taken by the authority, by the business under direction, or by a third party, the operational requirement is the same: samples must be traceably tied to the parent lot/pack identity, and custody must be documented so results are defensible.

Operational sampling controls include:

• Sample-to-parent linkage (lot, unit, location, timestamp)
• Chain-of-custody documentation for transfers and storage
• Condition protection to prevent spoilage or tampering arguments
• Result governance linking test outcomes to disposition decisions

Tell it like it is: if sampling linkage is broken, results may still be “bad news,” but you’ll have weaker ability to narrow scope or challenge assumptions.

7) Chain of custody: document every transition

Detention creates a legal sensitivity around custody. Product may remain on your site under restriction, be moved to controlled storage, be split for sampling, or be transferred for disposal. Each transition must be documented to prevent disputes and maintain integrity.

Custody discipline means:

• Time-stamped handovers between people, departments, sites, or third parties
• Seals and access control where appropriate to preserve integrity
• Non-editable records or auditable changes (who/what/when/why)
• Consistency between physical tags/signage and system status/location

Tell it like it is: the more custody ambiguity you allow, the more your whole record set gets questioned.

8) Disposition outcomes: release, rework, disposal, escalation

Detention ends in a disposition decision. Common outcomes include release, rework/relabel under control, withdrawal/recall actions, disposal, or escalation to seizure/condemnation. The operational requirement is that the decision is backed by evidence and that execution is provable.

Disposition controls include:

• Disposition approvals with rationale and evidence attachments
• Execution evidence for rework/relabel/disposal actions
• Quantity reconciliation proving what remains and what was removed
• Downstream scoping if any product has already shipped

Tell it like it is: if you can’t prove what you did, you haven’t really closed the detention event—commercially or legally.

9) Copy/paste detention readiness scorecard

Use this as a blunt self-check. If several answers are “no,” detention will be chaotic and scope will inflate.

The goal is simple: contain movement, preserve evidence, and keep scope narrow.

10) Common failure modes that trigger escalation

Detention escalates when the system cannot be trusted to hold and preserve truth. The failure patterns are predictable:

• Soft holds that can be bypassed by operations
• Inventory drift where detained stock moves without traceable events
• Unverified counts leading to disputes about what was actually detained
• Missing condition logs undermining disposition decisions
• Broken sampling linkage weakening scope decisions
• Manual scope assembly producing inconsistent lists and delays

Tell it like it is: detention is a stress test. If you fail the stress test, escalation becomes rational from the authority’s perspective.

11) How this maps to V5 by SG Systems Global

V5 supports detention readiness by making containment and evidence retrieval executable: system-enforced quarantine states, rapid lot/location truth, fast genealogy and distribution mapping, controlled event workflows (deviations, investigations, CAPA), and audit trails that preserve decision integrity. The practical goal is to produce a complete detention evidence pack quickly and to keep movement controls reliable under pressure.

Effective readiness comes from connecting:

• WMS: lot/location truth and enforced quarantine holds
• QMS: investigations, CAPA, complaint linkage, and controlled closure
• MES: execution evidence and batch history (where relevant)
• Integration: rapid consolidation of ERP, lab, and logistics data into one evidence chain

• Platform overview: V5 Solution Overview
• Inventory + holds: Warehouse Management System (WMS)
• Quality events: Quality Management System (QMS)
• Execution evidence: Manufacturing Execution System (MES)
• Integration layer: V5 Connect (API)

Tell it like it is: detention events are won or lost on speed and containment. V5 is designed to make both reliable.

12) Where this matters by industry

Detention risk is highest where product risk is high and distribution is fast. Chilled, ready-to-eat, and high-throughput distribution are especially sensitive because time/temperature uncertainty compresses decision windows. Multi-site and co-packer models increase exposure because identity drift and custody gaps are more likely if controls are inconsistent.

In Food Processing, the protective posture is always the same: strong holds, fast scope proof, and evidence packs that can be produced without reconstruction. In Produce Packing, speed is the control—slow answers inflate scope. In Sausage & Meat Processing, custody and traceability credibility are scrutinised because downstream risk and oversight are high.

13) Extended FAQ

Q1. Is a detention notice the same as a recall?
No. A recall is typically initiated by the business to remove product from the market. A detention notice is an enforcement restriction preventing movement while safety/compliance is investigated.

Q2. What’s the most important first action?
Freeze movement with system-enforced holds and verify physical location and counts. If product moves during detention without evidence, escalation risk rises fast.

Q3. Why do authorities care about location certainty?
Because detention is about preventing distribution while facts are established. If you can’t prove where the product is, you can’t prove it isn’t moving.

Q4. What evidence matters most?
A clean detained-universe list (lots/quantities/locations), hold history showing enforcement, condition logs, sampling linkage, and disposition proof.

Q5. How do we stress-test readiness?
Run a timed drill: select a “detained lot,” apply a hard hold, verify counts/locations, generate the evidence pack, and document custody/sampling/disposition steps.

Related Reading
Contain detention risk with Quarantine and Release Status, prove scope using End-to-End Lot Genealogy, and support fast retrieval with 24-Hour Record Response. Close events through Deviation Investigation, CAPA, and Record Retention.