fixed penalty notice

no-oneknowsme

spacey2012 wrote: »

They are asking him to grass himself up.
He has a right to silence.
Use it.

And the council also have the right to take him to court!

Rover_Driver

If the council are proposing to issue a FPN for littering under s.88 Environmental Protection Act 1990, contrary to s.87, the power is only to issue the FPN to someone they find littering. There are no powers to require anyone to subsequently admit anything.

Hence the advice that he has the right to silence.

HO87

I refer you to s.88(8A) EPA (as amended by the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005) which provides a power to demand name and address and the offence of failing to provide it (or providing a false one). It is clear that action is also being contemplated in respect of taxi licensing regs. I therefore refer you to my previous answer.

jkdd77

HO87 wrote: »

I refer you to s.88(8A) EPA (as amended by the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005) which provides a power to demand name and address and the offence of failing to provide it (or providing a false one). It is clear that action is also being contemplated in respect of taxi licensing regs. I therefore refer you to my previous answer.

That section only requires that a person stopped for littering give the name and address of the person to whom the officer proposes to give an FPN; it is not analogous to section 172 of the Road Traffic Act (which requires the name and address of the actual driver/ alleged offender on pain of criminal sanction for non-compliance).

Therefore, as correctly suggested by several legally qualified posters on Pepipoo, there is no obligation to name the person who dropped the litter (if any); if the matter goes to court, it would be for the prosecution to prove the identity of the offender beyond reasonable doubt, which they may or may not be able to do.

This link summarises the issue, at least relating to littering: http://www.cieh.org/ehp/ehp3.aspx?id=8314

However, London has since introduced its own byelaws creating a liability on the owner regardless of whether he/she dropped the litter, as per: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18294193

Rover_Driver

HO87 wrote: »

I refer you to s.88(8A) EPA (as amended by the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005) which provides a power to demand name and address and the offence of failing to provide it (or providing a false one). It is clear that action is also being contemplated in respect of taxi licensing regs. I therefore refer you to my previous answer.

s.88 (8A) Does not give any powers to require the registered keeper to nominate anyone.

The power under s.88 (8A) only applies to a person the authorised officer finds littering, and proposes to give that person a FPN.

HO87

Rover_Driver wrote: »

s.88 (8A) Does not give any powers to require the registered keeper to nominate anyone.

The power under s.88 (8A) only applies to a person the authorised officer finds littering, and proposes to give that person a FPN.

Based on what the OP has disclosed the person of whom the requirement is being made IS the person who threw the butt out of the window.

Insofar as the power that s.88(8A) confers a refusal to answer the question (in circumstances where other facts would in any event identify the driver - and therefore the dropper of the butt) would render the poster's friend liable to prosecution for a further offence.

Without knowledge of the full facts my reference to the O'Halloran case may have been hasty but there are other powers that may well have been brought to bear here (that are not set out) that are analogous to s.172 and to which the judgment is relevant.

@jkdd There may indeed be no obligation on a third party to name the person involved in such an offence (by virtue of s.88(8A) but that is to ignore additional powers relating to other offences and facts that apply here. If the requirement is made of the butt-dropper (as would appear to be the case) then the obligation remains and, as explained above, an offence committed if the details are not provided or false details given.

Trebor16

HO87 wrote: »

I refer you to s.88(8A) EPA (as amended by the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005) which provides a power to demand name and address and the offence of failing to provide it (or providing a false one). It is clear that action is also being contemplated in respect of taxi licensing regs. I therefore refer you to my previous answer.

That is applicable when an official has stopped a person at the time of an alleged offence. It is not applicable when trying to find out from a registered keeper after the event. Defra have issued guidelines which are very specific.

Rover_Driver

HO87 wrote: »

Insofar as the power that s.88(8A) confers a refusal to answer the question (in circumstances where other facts would in any event identify the driver - and therefore the dropper of the butt) would render the poster's friend liable to prosecution for a further offence.

It could depend under what alleged power the council are asking who the driver of the car was - there is none in the EPA for littering, which is one of the reasons for the problems for councils, and the Defra guidelines.

The requirement under s.88 (8A) only applies to a person who has been found littering contrary to s.88, and and refuses their name and address.

The OP's friend had not been found littering, only that someone in a car registered to him, was allegedly seen to drop some litter.

If the OP's friend replies to their request and admits he was driving at the time, s.88(8A) may well apply.

kev2012

I hope you all don't mind if I go off at a slight tangent here folks.
What is the situation if a police car stops a vehicle for litter from the window(something I would never do BTW) but a small child had dropped/chucked something out. Is the driver auto fined as being responsible for the vehicle?
Thanks