The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) revealed it has provisionally found that the UK’s three principal suppliers of rolled lead broke competition law
Rolled lead is an important product for the construction industry, used mainly for roofing.
The CMA has provisionally found that the three, who account for about 90% of UK rolled lead supplies, entered into a cartel to share the market amongst themselves through, for example, the allocation of customers.
The CMA claims that the cartel:
- colluded on prices;
- exchanged commercially sensitive information;
- refrained from targeting some of each other’s customers; and
- collectively refused to supply another company whose business threatened to disrupt the market sharing arrangement.
The CMA has been investigating Associated Lead Mills Ltd, which has its headquarters in Hoddesdon, and its sister company Jamestown Metals Limited, H.J. Enthoven Ltd (trading as BLM British Lead, which has its headquarters in Welwyn Garden City) and Calder Industrial Materials Ltd, since July 2017.
In a statement of objections issued today (27 March), the CMA has outlined its provisional findings that the three suppliers entered into this anti-competitive arrangement which broke competition law.
Michael Grenfell, the CMA’s executive director for Enforcement, said: “These are the 3 biggest suppliers of rolled lead in the UK, between them making up about 90% of supplies. Their products are in everyday use by builders, especially for roofing of both homes and businesses across the UK.
“After a thorough investigation, the CMA has today provisionally found that these three companies colluded among themselves to share out the market. The CMA hopes that this provisional finding will send a strong reminder that companies need to follow competition laws. These are crucial to protecting customers from paying more for products than they should do.”
The CMA’s findings are, at this stage in its investigation, provisional and do not necessarily lead to a decision that the companies have breached competition law. The firms now have the opportunity to consider the detail of the CMA’s provisional findings and respond to it.
