Strange question

neilwoods

Was in llandudno the other day, and saw 4 people walking up and down the main street, dressed in stab vests, with cctv camera and audio recording on there person's.

Was wondering who they where, if some sort of crazy money wasting scheme dreamed up by conwy council

FatAndy

This sounds like the litter wardens. It's a private company who are able to issue fines for dropping litter, dog fouling, etc. The fine is £75, part of which goes to the company and part to Conwy Council. As the council don't pay the company anything other than their share of the fine it's actually a money raising scheme for once.

p.s. Hope you didn't drop anything as you walked past the camera!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-20579585

neilwoods

they will be charging us for the air we breath next. Maybe if the damn lazy council emptied the bins more often, people wouldn't need to litter so much.

Have heard of about these, didn't know they were here though. Seem's the one's who get fined tend to be the elderly and families, not the ones who litter the most.

pamsdish

It will be the ones who don`t look like they are going to be able to fight back who get fined, ever noticed how traffic wardens don`t go near cars if somebody in them.

neilwoods

Saw them again today, handing out tickets. I thought to myself what if you refuse to give name and address, what can they do.

And after getting in and 5 minutes of searching, there is nothing they can do, not a criminal offence to with hold your name or give false name.

FatAndy

neilwoods wrote: »

Saw them again today, handing out tickets. I thought to myself what if you refuse to give name and address, what can they do.

And after getting in and 5 minutes of searching, there is nothing they can do, not a criminal offence to with hold your name or give false name.

I believe it's an offence under section 88 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. It's also an offence not to give your name or to give a false one.

"[F2(8A)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.

(8B)A person commits an offence if—

(a)he fails to give his name and address when required to do so under subsection (8A) above, or

(b)he gives a false or inaccurate name or address in response to a requirement under that subsection.

(8C)A person guilty of an offence under subsection (8B) above is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/88


Personally I have no problem with this scheme, I hope they catch as many people as possible (and not just the "easy" ones). Littering is a big problem, especially in an area that relies so heavily on tourism, so anything that can be done to alleviate the problem should be welcomed in my book. Hopefully the presence of these wardens will act as a deterent as much as anything else.

neilwoods

Yes Environmental Protection Act 1990. However it is the council who brought in a Private company who are not acting under environment agency, hence why no law is broken by not given name or false name.

So you are favour of the council having a money making scheme to hit the people who will comply and pay the fines like little sheep.

May be under some strange misconception here, but I thought this is why we pay our council tax, to employ road sweepers. So would it not be better to have someone go up the street 3 or 4 times a day to pick the litter up.

FatAndy

neilwoods wrote: »

Yes Environmental Protection Act 1990. However it is the council who brought in a Private company who are not acting under environment agency, hence why no law is broken by not given name or false name.

An "authorised litter authority", such as Conwy Council, can appoint "authorised officers" who are not it's own employees to issue fines. It has nothing to do with the Environment Agency. So if you drop litter you are breaking the law and so long as the person issuing the fine has been given the correct authority by the "authorised litter authority", i.e. the council you would be breaking the law by giving them a false name.


F8(10)In this section—

• [F9“authorised officer”, in relation to a litter authority, means—
  (a)
  an employee of the authority who is authorised in writing by the authority for the purpose of giving notices under this section;
  
  (b)
  any person who, in pursuance of arrangements made with the authority, has the function of giving such notices and is authorised in writing by the authority to perform that function; and
  
  (c)
  any employee of such a person who is authorised in writing by the authority for the purpose of giving such notices;]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/88

neilwoods wrote: »

So you are favour of the council having a money making scheme to hit the people who will comply and pay the fines like little sheep..

I'm 100% in favour of fining idiots who drop litter or who allow their dogs to foul the pavement and don't clear up their mess. It's anti-social behaviour, it shows no respect for the community as a whole and I'm not sure why anyone would be in anyway upset by this scheme unless they're a serial offender themselves.

The fact is the council wouldn't make a single penny if people showed a little respect for the rest of us and disposed of their litter/dog faeces appropriately, and hopefully once the anti-social yobs realise they might be made to pay for misbehaviour they might starting thinking twice about their actions.

neilwoods wrote: »

May be under some strange misconception here, but I thought this is why we pay our council tax, to employ road sweepers. So would it not be better to have someone go up the street 3 or 4 times a day to pick the litter up.

Personally I'd rather not have the litter there in first place.

neilwoods

Sorry but it has got !!!!!! all to do with anti social behaviour, its an easy money making scheme for the council, get a company in who they don't pay. So it is in the interest of the private company to target as many people as possible, so they go after the easiest targets they come across, its the anti-social yobs as you call them get away with it.

These are just some of the comments about XFOR from newspaper articles.

"Members of the public are being treated as ‘cash cows’ by over-zealous litter patrols who work for a firm that has signed lucrative commission-only contracts with councils, say critics."

"One woman in Blaenau Gwent, South Wales, was fined by Xfor for dropping a thread from her glove accidentally. Another was fined for walking her dog in a field she had used for 30 years, unaware it had been turned into a no-dog zone."

So yes they are targeting anyone they can to make money, as another report says, the company has raked in £1.6 million.

Ok so, maybe you can't refuse to give name, but as other news articles say, some councils are losing money as a lot of people give false name and address, and there is little they can do to check it out.