Fly-Tipping Letter Advice

Section62

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Section62 said

The opportunity to respond to any questions accompanying a FPN isn't designed to entrap people.  

OP hasn't had a FPN, they've just they had a letter asking about the matter, which is to gather evidence to issue a FPN. The council aren't interested in whether you have excuses of being mistaken in your actions, they just want to know whether you commit the offence. 

If the council had the evidence they'd have issued a FPN, they haven't so possibly don't but would certainly hope that, as is the case with most people, when they attempt to explain their innocence they instead end up saying something that incriminates themselves.

Thanks and apologies, I misread the bit in the OP's post about having to pay the FPN as meaning they had a FPN with the letter, but can now see that wasn't the case. I've amended my post.

However, the overall point remains the same.  The council (allegedly) has evidence in the form of a cardboard box with the OP's name on it.  They have used the name to obtain an address, which implies the place the box was left was reasonably close to the OP's address.  The letter is giving the OP the opportunity to deny any involvement in the box being found where it was - for example that there might be someone with the same name living nearby.

It is difficult to give better advice without more detail on the how, what and where though, and that might be information the OP is better off keeping to themselves, or only sharing with a solicitor.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Section62 said: If the council instead issued a notice saying "Pay this or go to court, no correspondence will be entered into" then there would - rightly - be claims the process was unfair and heavy handed.  That doesn't necessarily mean that replying to any optional questions is a good idea, just that characterising it as an attempt at achieving self-incrimination isn't very accurate.

FPNs for fly tipping and littering don't really have an appeals process, councils usually say you can put forward information for them to consider, but that is only to prove the offence wasn't committed, or the FPN was incorrectly issued, presumably councils do this because taking people to court is expensive and a rather pointless expense if the person is indeed innocent. 

The whole heavy handed thing is skewed, if OP left a dozen bin bags on the street or this was the third time a box with their name on had been found then you can understand but, taking OP at their word, this kind of thing is best dealt with through education, i.e don't do it again or will cost you a grand. 

Some councils operate an informal "challenge" process which amounts to an appeal.

But the point was that inviting/allowing input from the person alleged to have committed the offence is about making the system fairer by avoiding prosecution of people who are wholly innocent.  If the FPN system didn't exist (or was deemed inappropriate in a particular case) then there would be a process of discussion/interview to establish the facts prior to a decision to prosecute or not.  The thinking behind the FPN regime wasn't to eliminate these discussions, and to do so would bring the system into disrepute.  The courts would quickly get fed up with councils prosecuting people without giving them a chance to set out why they were innocent (/shouldn't be prosecuted) at the earliest opportunity.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Section62 said:

 If the FPN system didn't exist (or was deemed inappropriate in a particular case) then there would be a process of discussion/interview to establish the facts prior to a decision to prosecute or not.  The thinking behind the FPN regime wasn't to eliminate these discussions, and to do so would bring the system into disrepute. 

That process would still be with the purpose of finding guilt, ultimately you are innocent, until proven otherwise and that is the exact purpose of such a discussion.

I don't disagree with the FPN principle but, as OP has now said what I imagined, they left a cardboard box next to a bin, that really is an education type of matter, (particularly when questioning why the bins were full, lack of appropriate facilities? Although that digresses and doesn't assist the OP), at what point do councils see this an opportunity to raise funds rather than see the streets free from rubbish but again digression.  

Section62 said:
 The letter is giving the OP the opportunity to deny any involvement in the box being found where it was - for example that there might be someone with the same name living nearby.

As above it is already a given that the OP didn't leave the box there and is for the council to prove otherwise, therefore the questions can only be for the purpose of establishing guilt. 

If OP is called John Smith the council are going to struggle to prove beyond reasonable doubt it was the OP, if OP is named Moon Unit Exa Dark Sideræl they would have probably got an FPN off the bat.  

All that matters is whether the council can prove OP committed an offence, when they find a box with a name and address councils seem to issue a FPN (based on threads here over the years), as this box only had a name on it answering the councils questions only serves to say the wrong thing and get blamed (although here OP admits it so answering the questions is pointless, they either fess up and face the consequences or keep quiet and see what happens). 

shinytop

I have direct experience of getting off a fly tipping notice.  I put some boxes with my address on them in a recycling bin (stupid I know) and they were later found some distance away in a lay-by. I assume someone else took them, used them for whatever then dumped them.  I discussed this with the council then they cancelled the FPN. 

Are you sure you didn't put your cardboard in the correct bin and someone else moved it because the bin was full? 

Section62

shinytop said:

I have direct experience of getting off a fly tipping notice.  I put some boxes with my address on them in a recycling bin (stupid I know) and they were later found some distance away in a lay-by. I assume someone else took them, used them for whatever then dumped them.  I discussed this with the council then they cancelled the FPN. 

Are you sure you didn't put your cardboard in the correct bin and someone else moved it because the bin was full? 

Beware of not telling the truth.... CCTV is everywhere these days.  In your case it was true, but that doesn't mean other people will get away with claiming the same.

Mgman1965

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Section62 said:

 If the FPN system didn't exist (or was deemed inappropriate in a particular case) then there would be a process of discussion/interview to establish the facts prior to a decision to prosecute or not.  The thinking behind the FPN regime wasn't to eliminate these discussions, and to do so would bring the system into disrepute. 

That process would still be with the purpose of finding guilt, ultimately you are innocent, until proven otherwise and that is the exact purpose of such a discussion.

I don't disagree with the FPN principle but, as OP has now said what I imagined, they left a cardboard box next to a bin, that really is an education type of matter, (particularly when questioning why the bins were full, lack of appropriate facilities? Although that digresses and doesn't assist the OP), at what point do councils see this an opportunity to raise funds rather than see the streets free from rubbish but again digression.  

Section62 said:
 The letter is giving the OP the opportunity to deny any involvement in the box being found where it was - for example that there might be someone with the same name living nearby.

As above it is already a given that the OP didn't leave the box there and is for the council to prove otherwise, therefore the questions can only be for the purpose of establishing guilt. 

If OP is called John Smith the council are going to struggle to prove beyond reasonable doubt it was the OP, if OP is named Moon Unit Exa Dark Sideræl they would have probably got an FPN off the bat.  

All that matters is whether the council can prove OP committed an offence, when they find a box with a name and address councils seem to issue a FPN (based on threads here over the years), as this box only had a name on it answering the councils questions only serves to say the wrong thing and get blamed (although here OP admits it so answering the questions is pointless, they either fess up and face the consequences or keep quiet and see what happens). 

Councils in these cash strapped times are looking for any and every income stream they can find, and morals, and sometimes even legalities  don't enter into the equation. 

If it doesn't bring them money in (education) or costs them, they aren't interested.

My local council is suddenly putting up loads of cameras to enforce yellow box junctions,  no left / right turns and bus lane cameras  in the name of road safety and issuing thousands of FPN's.

Residents are complaining that Resident parking permits have started being hiked in price every year with little or no enforcement of them.

Councils these days are not there to serve you, they're there to serve themselves  and their councillors expenses.

Ditzy_Mitzy

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Section62 said:

 If the FPN system didn't exist (or was deemed inappropriate in a particular case) then there would be a process of discussion/interview to establish the facts prior to a decision to prosecute or not.  The thinking behind the FPN regime wasn't to eliminate these discussions, and to do so would bring the system into disrepute. 

That process would still be with the purpose of finding guilt, ultimately you are innocent, until proven otherwise and that is the exact purpose of such a discussion.

I don't disagree with the FPN principle but, as OP has now said what I imagined, they left a cardboard box next to a bin, that really is an education type of matter, (particularly when questioning why the bins were full, lack of appropriate facilities? Although that digresses and doesn't assist the OP), at what point do councils see this an opportunity to raise funds rather than see the streets free from rubbish but again digression.  

Section62 said:
 The letter is giving the OP the opportunity to deny any involvement in the box being found where it was - for example that there might be someone with the same name living nearby.

As above it is already a given that the OP didn't leave the box there and is for the council to prove otherwise, therefore the questions can only be for the purpose of establishing guilt. 

If OP is called John Smith the council are going to struggle to prove beyond reasonable doubt it was the OP, if OP is named Moon Unit Exa Dark Sideræl they would have probably got an FPN off the bat.  

All that matters is whether the council can prove OP committed an offence, when they find a box with a name and address councils seem to issue a FPN (based on threads here over the years), as this box only had a name on it answering the councils questions only serves to say the wrong thing and get blamed (although here OP admits it so answering the questions is pointless, they either fess up and face the consequences or keep quiet and see what happens). 

How did you find out my name? 

OP: this probably won't go away by itself.  Assuming it doesn't you'll be best off writing to the council to fess up and to offer a grovelling apology and statement of mitigation - i.e. 'I thought it would be all right to leave the box there, but now realize my action was exceptionally stupid'.  I've made council-issued parking tickets go away by those means.  

AskAsk

Section62 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

I doubt the council are interested in much more than getting a fine out you but the fact they haven't issued one presumably means they don't have enough evidence yet, which is why they want you to incriminate yourself by answering their questions.

It isn't that.  The council cannot issue a 'fine' - only a court can do that - which is the factual reason why they haven't issued a fine (and won't).

The FPN isn't legally a 'fine', but it amounts to that, and laypeople in general (and the media) will often call a FPN a 'fine' even though it isn't.

So the first part of your comment above is about right (in layperson's terms) - i.e. that the council will probably only be interested in getting the FPN paid.

The opportunity to respond to any questions accompanying a FPN isn't designed to entrap people.  It is a necessary part of the justice process to allow people to respond to an allegation (if they wish) and explain why they believe the allegation to be false or unreasonable.  If the council instead issued a notice saying "Pay this or go to court, no correspondence will be entered into" then there would - rightly - be claims the process was unfair and heavy handed.  That doesn't necessarily mean that replying to any optional questions is a good idea, just that characterising it as an attempt at achieving self-incrimination isn't very accurate.

If the FPN isn't paid and the recipient is then prosecuted (e.g. through a magistrates court) then the fine (if any) on conviction doesn't go to the council, at best they would get some of their costs awarded.  Which is one reason why councils wanted the FPN process introduced in the first place.

I got a fine from Hackney council when I lived there as I had left my black bin bags out before the bin day.  So they can certainly issue a fine alright.

km1500

if it was a genuine mistake ie you put your box by the bins but it was not in the right place by the buns then you could contact your local counsellor and see if they can help as this seems ridiculous and you need to fight back

Section62

AskAsk said:

Section62 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

I doubt the council are interested in much more than getting a fine out you but the fact they haven't issued one presumably means they don't have enough evidence yet, which is why they want you to incriminate yourself by answering their questions.

It isn't that.  The council cannot issue a 'fine' - only a court can do that - which is the factual reason why they haven't issued a fine (and won't).

The FPN isn't legally a 'fine', but it amounts to that, and laypeople in general (and the media) will often call a FPN a 'fine' even though it isn't.

....

I got a fine from Hackney council when I lived there as I had left my black bin bags out before the bin day.  So they can certainly issue a fine alright.

It wasn't a fine you got... see above.

Section62

km1500 said:

if it was a genuine mistake ie you put your box by the bins but it was not in the right place by the buns then you could contact your local counsellor and see if they can help as this seems ridiculous and you need to fight back

Councillors shouldn't really get involved, other than to signpost how to contact the right department at the council if the recipient of a FPN is unsure what to do.

This is enforcement in relation to an alleged criminal offence, so the equivalent might be contacting the Police and Crime Commissioner and asking them to help get you off your speeding 'fine' because you were mistakenly driving at 40mph in a 30 zone.  Not the done thing.

The way the council handles this investigation and the decisions it makes will be set out in a policy and governed by legislation, including RIPA/IPA.  Councillors can get involved in general matters relating to the enforcement policy, but would be on thin ice if they involve themselves in individual cases.