Accused of Flytipping - Advice Needed

molerat

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

Because I don't take the view that the Council is some kind of evil behemoth intent on nailing me for something I didn't do. I would want to help them; they represent me. They are people like me who want a clean environment and they are prepared to ask questions to find out who is spoiling where we live.

I really think we ought to get away from the notion that the Council is a faceless entity who will ride roughshod over the people they serve. I mean, they are probably called Mabel or Brian not Spectre .

I am afraid that most of these interviews are run by jumped up little !!!!!! with only one thing in mind and that is finding someone guilty of the offence, whether that is the one actually guilty or not is of little relevance, it improves their clean up rate - guilty until proven innocent.

I would attend the interview, accompanied by a friend, with a prepared written statement refuting any knowledge of the tipping. Only give name and address and answer any question with "I refer you to my written statement"

Viberduo

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

Because I don't take the view that the Council is some kind of evil behemoth intent on nailing me for something I didn't do. I would want to help them; they represent me. They are people like me who want a clean environment and they are prepared to ask questions to find out who is spoiling where we live.

I really think we ought to get away from the notion that the Council is a faceless entity who will ride roughshod over the people they serve. I mean, they are probably called Mabel or Brian not Spectre .

Most people know otherwise thats why they say the Council is faceless, for example in my hometown they promised that they would not sell on council housing, then changed mind but said no rent increases in 4 years (locals had to agree to the sale) then 6 months later rent increases, were promised same day repairs but had people waiting months later for minor things, waste money every year on repairs to roads that dont need done, waste like 50 grand on a statue whilst homes are falling to pieces, also the stories of people waiting months for repairs and not getting them done, or powercuts for days at a time in countyside areas and local council high ups getting stuff done instantly by their contractors even minor things that would of been cheaper for a small local company, the same one only allows at Christmas 1 extra bin bag beside wheelie bin for rubbish any more and they refuse to take the whole lot despite not coming back for 2 weeks, or if the lid is not fully closed wont take rubbish, the only time they take more is if you pay 50p per bag for a council branded one that is as thin as the pound shop ones, they even charge for dog poop bags.

Countryside buses are a nightmare as they are in the back pocket of bus firm who are meant to be subsidised but cut buses without telling people and council says they have a right to do what they want.

Thats just 1 council, I know others that are bad in their own way, had one accuse me of benefit fraud because I stored some stuff at my old property where a friend moved in and stayed there a few times whilst picking up stuff and was accused of still living there and treated like a major criminal and scum of the earth.

ailz95

As it is a taped interview they should give her a copy when she leaves. Tell her to take a spare tape and ask them to copy the recording for her just in case. Or better still a tape recorder and she can tape it herself. Good Luck, I've been on the receiving end of dealing with 'authority' that had already made their mind up.

Lord_Baltimore

I have no axe to grind with the Council and evidently feel less paranoid about their intentions.

It's the Council for goodness sake not the Spanish Inquisition.

I support any action they take to deal with the scourge of fly tipping and if a few blameless people, myself included, are asked a few questions every now and then, well so be it.

Where there is strong but unprovable suspicion about littering, I feel the Council should be able to use the thumbscrew supplied by HMSO.

jhs14

Whilst I understand the logic behind not attending, or attending but answering no comment, I think in reality I would attend and answer all questions. If indeed there is no possibility of any evidence linking me to the 'crime' (as is said to be the case here), then I would take the view that, however hard they try to pin it on me, there no way they could 'trip me up' because there's no evidence at all, and therefore nothing to gain by playing games and refusing to answer questions.

Guest101

jhs14 wrote: »

Whilst I understand the logic behind not attending, or attending but answering no comment, I think in reality I would attend and answer all questions. If indeed there is no possibility of any evidence linking me to the 'crime' (as is said to be the case here), then I would take the view that, however hard they try to pin it on me, there no way they could 'trip me up' because there's no evidence at all, and therefore nothing to gain by playing games and refusing to answer questions.

I wouldnt call exercising your rights as playing games. This is a trained person seeking to catch you out.

From the council’s perspective, they reasonably believe they have the right person. They are aware that people lie all the time. They are looking for evidence to prosecute. They are exploring all avenues. They must justify the cost of the investigation.
Why risk self-incrimination.
e.g.
Q: who lives in your property with you?
A: Myself and my partner.
Q: So it could’ve been your partner that had perhaps placed the rubbish there?
A: no, ofcourse not.
Q: How can you be so sure?
A: I cant, I just don’t think that he/she would….
(next step – interview partner)

jhs14

Guest101 wrote: »

I wouldnt call exercising your rights as playing games. This is a trained person seeking to catch you out.

From the council’s perspective, they reasonably believe they have the right person. They are aware that people lie all the time. They are looking for evidence to prosecute. They are exploring all avenues. They must justify the cost of the investigation.
Why risk self-incrimination.
e.g.
Q: who lives in your property with you?
A: Myself and my partner.
Q: So it could’ve been your partner that had perhaps placed the rubbish there?
A: no, ofcourse not.
Q: How can you be so sure?
A: I cant, I just don’t think that he/she would….
(next step – interview partner)

Sure, but you mention prosecution - how is that going to happen with a total lack of evidence? Even if I did answer honestly, and admit that, as a person with arms and legs who lives in the street, my partner could have done it. So they interview partner - then what? To be honest, if their argument is simply that somebody must have done it, and as a person who lives near, it must have been me, then I'd enjoy going along and watching their case fall apart.

I'd rather that than be uncooperative and leave them thinking that it was me after all, even if they then, in their infinite mercy, decide to drop their investigation and 'let me off' as it were.

stator

They already think it was you and will continue to think it was you no matter what arguments you give at interview. You will not clear your name by going to this interview. The council or police do not find people innocent. They simply find a matter has insufficient evidence to prosecute.

jhs14

Sure, but I would at least like the individuals interviewing me to realise 'this is a waste of time, this guy is clearly innocent'. I would find it very irritating if they actually thought I was the perpetrator, which they might do after I exercise my right to non cooperation with their enquiries. I know full well that the council itself isn't going to apologise for wasting my time, they will simply state that they are dropping their enquiries, as you say.

Guest101

jhs14 wrote: »

Sure, but I would at least like the individuals interviewing me to realise 'this is a waste of time, this guy is clearly innocent'. I would find it very irritating if they actually thought I was the perpetrator, which they might do after I exercise my right to non cooperation with their enquiries. I know full well that the council itself isn't going to apologise for wasting my time, they will simply state that they are dropping their enquiries, as you say.

What makes you think they'll not think this person is lying?

I'd prefer they think whatever they like and I don't waste my time on jumped up little so and so's.
Would be funny to attend, with a recorder and caution them though...