trafford council littering

Stigy

catgorm wrote: »

they are quoting;
section 87- enviromental protection act 1990
section 18- clan neighbourhoods and enviroment act 2005

the offender is required to provide her name and address and under section 88 (8a, 8b and 8 c) of the enviro protection act 1990 amended by sec 19 of the clean neibourhood and eviro act 200d commits an offence if she fails to do so, carries a max fine of £1000

there for it is necessary for you to provide the offender details in writing in 14 days of date of this letter

thanks

Unless there's other legislation (unlikely), then the responsibility to provide details would rest with the alleged offender and not the driver of a car they were passenger in. They cant prosecute you for not giving details of an alleged offender. Sounds to me like they're clutching at straws. I'm pretty sure aiding and abetting wouldn't come in to this, either...

Judging by the fact that you stated that the car was spotted by an employee (I think that's what I read...), even if this did get as far as the Magistrates' Court, there's so many defence factors, such as the identity of the alleged offender (did anybody get his or her description?), lack of CCTV evidence, incorrect vehicle being spotted etc etc.

taffy056

But haven't they misused the information from the dvla ? Doesn't it state that to get the RK details it must be for a traffic related issue? Aren't they abusing their right to garner info when it's unconnected with the RK ?

Coupon-mad

taffy056 wrote: »

But haven't they misused the information from the dvla ? Doesn't it state that to get the RK details it must be for a traffic related issue? Aren't they abusing their right to garner info when it's unconnected with the RK ?

I think that's a good point. I think the OP could make a DVLA complaint, what does everyone else think?

HO87

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I think that's a good point. I think the OP could make a DVLA complaint, what does everyone else think?

No. I think it would be a waste of time. Requests for RK details are not simply limited to motoring matters.

As for the sections quoted - as already pointed out by Stigy - there is no requirement that I can see (and I've scoured them) for the OP to provide any information whatsoever provided the letter actually specifies that they want the details of the passenger rather than simply asking for the name and address of the offender which could be interpreted as referring to the registered keeper/driver. There is no power whatsoever contained in the sections quoted by Trafford for them to require the details of the passenger or any other person. For them to suggest otherwise is utterly fallacious.

Aside from all of that I'm seriously unconvinced that there is any power to issue fixed penalty notices retrospectively for litter under this Act in any event. The relevant section (s.88(1) Environmental Protection Act 1990) says:

Where on any occasion an authorised officer of a litter authority finds a person who he has reason to believe has on that occasion committed an offence under section 87 above in the area of that authority, he may give that person a notice offering him the opportunity of discharging any liability to conviction for that offence by payment of a fixed penalty.

That permits the issue of a FPN at the time of the offence and only at the time - not some unspecified time later. The power to require a name and address conferred in the same section extends only to the person issuing the ticket and can only be made of the person to whom he intends to issue the ticket to. The subsection (s.88(8A) is very explicit:

If an authorised officer of a litter authority proposes to give a person a notice under this section, the officer may require the person to give him his name and address.

Methinks someone at Trafford is living in cloud-cuckoo-land and a land, presumably, where jackboots and goose-stepping would be normal.

Sirdan

HO87 wrote: »

No. I think it would be a waste of time. Requests for RK details are not simply limited to motoring matters.

As for the sections quoted - as already pointed out by Stigy - there is no requirement that I can see (and I've scoured them) for the OP to provide any information whatsoever provided the letter actually specifies that they want the details of the passenger rather than simply asking for the name and address of the offender which could be interpreted as referring to the registered keeper/driver. There is no power whatsoever contained in the sections quoted by Trafford for them to require the details of the passenger or any other person. For them to suggest otherwise is utterly fallacious.

Aside from all of that I'm seriously unconvinced that there is any power to issue fixed penalty notices retrospectively for litter under this Act in any event. The relevant section (s.88(1) Environmental Protection Act 1990) says:



That permits the issue of a FPN at the time of the offence and only at the time - not some unspecified time later. The power to require a name and address conferred in the same section extends only to the person issuing the ticket and can only be made of the person to whom he intends to issue the ticket to. The subsection (s.88(8A) is very explicit:



Methinks someone at Trafford is living in cloud-cuckoo-land and a land, presumably, where jackboots and goose-stepping would be normal.

I've always thought these council "powers" are all based on the British sense of fair play ..the French certainly would not stand for this nonsense.

So if you fail to give your name and address you commit an offence ? How exactly do the council pursue for that offence ????
I don't believe the council employee can arrest you for that offence.
So what are the options available ?

1) Call the Police -I suspect they won't attend for such a trivial matter or if they do you will be long gone by the time they arrive.

2) Note your car details as you drive off but how do they know the driver (you) is actually the keeper ?

3) If you are on foot they could follow you home but again just because you go into a house and stay there doesn't mean you are on the electoral roll for that address, I suppose if you stay in the house they could call the Police (again) so that they can mount a "stake out" -not very likely is it ???

Just one of hundreds of pieces of legislation introduced in recent years which are wholly reliant on the goodwill of the suspect in order for them to work !!! :rotfl:

HO87

I think the important aspect is that according to s.88(1) the person who issues the ticket must also be the person who saw the alleged offence. After all, the wording is:

Where on any occasion an authorised officer of a litter authority finds a person who he has reason to believe has on that occasion committed an offence under section 87 above in the area of that authority, he may give that person a notice

I see no retrospective delegated power to issue a fixed penalty. There would be nothing to stop Trafford pursuing matters by way of summons but that, presumably, would defeat the object of making a quick buck.

@ OP I suggest that you reply immediately by letter asking where in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 s.88(8A), (8B) and (8C) (as amended) they have the power to require you to provide the name and address of a third person and what authority they intend to rely on in respect of the 14 day limit they have quoted.

Coblcris

DEFRA guidelines are very clear that they must identify the alleged offender before proceeding to action.
I would complain to DEFRA.

taffy056

HO87 wrote: »

No. I think it would be a waste of time. Requests for RK details are not simply limited to motoring matters.

I beg to differ, there is nothing in the giving of information to third parties from the DVLA covering councils issuing littering fines, this from the direct gov website

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/AdviceOnKeepingYourVehicle/DG_4022067

The minimum evidence needed to demonstrate reasonable cause
http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@motor/documents/digitalasset/dg_193598.pdf

HO87

taffy056 wrote: »

I beg to differ, there is nothing in the giving of information to third parties from the DVLA covering councils issuing littering fines, this from the direct gov website

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/AdviceOnKeepingYourVehicle/DG_4022067

The minimum evidence needed to demonstrate reasonable cause
http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@motor/documents/digitalasset/dg_193598.pdf

I refer you to s.35(2) Data Protection Act 1998.

taffy056

HO87 wrote: »

I refer you to s.35(2) Data Protection Act 1998.

But doesn't that mean the release of information in relation to court cases that could be pending ? And as it's been established that the RK is not the one at fault but someone who could be standing at the side of the road giving directions