BOROUGH OF POOLE
ENVIRONMENT OVERVIEW GROUP
On 28th July 2005
THE USE OF FIXED PENALTY NOTICES IN RELATION TO CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES.
1INTRODUCTION
1.1The legislation controlling the use of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) has been amended and extended. Following the previous report to EOG on the 7th October 2004, The Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act has become law. This legislation extends the use of FPN’s and further encourages local authorities to adopt them in relation the “enviro-crimes”.
2DECISION REQUIRED
2.1 That members consider the proposals as outlined within the report and make recommendations to Cabinet in relation to those matters.
3BACKGROUND/INFORMATION
3.1The authority takes “enviro crime” seriously and has recognised it’s importance in the Striving for Excellence priority “Clean, green & safe”. Recent changes in the priority and management of enforcement action (see 4.9 below) mean that the Borough is detecting more offences and therefore processing more prosecution cases.
3.2Poole Opinion Panel
Following the previous EOG, consultation took place with the Poole Opinion Panel in relation to their views on enviro crimes. The top five issues reported by the Poole Opinion Panel where they would like to see us take more action to protect the appearance of the town are:
·littering (77%)
·dog fouling (66%)
·fly tipping (62%)
·graffiti (58%)
·highway obstructions (56%)
Further, 98% of respondents thought that residents should take responsibility for picking up after their dogs foul.
3.3The use of fixed penalties for enforcement against these enviro-crimes will potentially further improve the publics view that the Borough is tackling these problems.
3.4Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 received Royal Assent on 7th April 2005 and as of 7th June 2005 a number provisions came into force. The remainder, including flexibilities relating to FPN’s, are due to be enacted in April 2006.
3.5As of 7th June 2005 the offence of littering has been extended to all open places including private property, lakes, rivers and beaches. Also the act clarified that cigarette butts and discarded chewing gum are litter. This potentially could see an increase in complaints and enforcement cases.
3.6With regards to FPNs Local Authorities will be able to specify the amount of the fixed penalty notice, or if no amount is specified, then the FPN will be £75 (for litter, distribution of free literature, dog control and dog fouling). LAs can also introduce early payment discounts e.g. if paid within 2 weeks then only pay £50, with a penalty of £75 after that period. This freedom would be welcomed and might overcome some of the difficulties associated with FPN processing costs and their usefulness as a deterrent.
3.7Fixed penalties that are set for other offences include:
- FPNs for businesses that fail to produce waste transfer notes. Penalty of £300.
- FPNs for waste carriers that fail to produce their registration details or evidence that they do not need to be registered. Penalty of £300.
3.8Monies received from all the above can be kept by the Borough. The legislation requires that revenues are ‘ring-fenced’ for expenditure on items related to that function e.g. receipts from dog fouling and litter offences could be used to purchase dog and litter bins. However recent changes permit authorities that obtained a ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ rating at CPA to have the freedom to use the receipts in whatever way they choose. Members will be aware that the Council obtained a ‘good’ CPA rating.
4 ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
4.1The revenues raised by utilising FPN’S are unlikely to be large. The cost of processing an FPN is less than preparing a prosecution report but the opportunity to claim costs associated with the investigation will be lost.
Offenders who choose not to pay a notice can be prosecuted in line with existing protocols.
4.2Some authorities report high non-payment figures with little success at follow up prosecution due to the difficulty of proving identity. However establishing the true identity of a person is not a simple matter and the difficulties and limitations apply whether a fixed penalty or prosecution policy is implemented. Members should also be aware that there is a cost of processing such payments through the council’s own debtor systems. The likely impact of all these factors is that the net financial resource available to the council is likely to be very small, if indeed there is any surplus. The following table illustrates the number of FPNs issued by a selection of councils.
Council
/Fixed Penalty Totals
Issued / Paid / Court action / UnpaidBarnsley / 354 / 220 / 9 / 125
Bournemouth / 36 / 33 / N/A / 3
Christchurch / 65 / 59 / 1 / 5
East Dorset / 113 / 100 / 3 / 10
Fareham / 144 / 130 / 5 / 9
North Dorset / 64 / 63 / 1 / 0
North Warwickshire / 163 / 115 / 5 / 43
Southampton / 283 / 258 / 19 / 6
4.3Local authorities who choose to use FPNs are required to report to DEFRA on:-
- The number issued
- The number paid
- The number dropped
- The number of prosecutions following non-payment of penalty
4.4Annual return figures from DEFRA for councils who reported back their fixed penalty notice figures for the financial year 03-04 are as follows:
Issued / Paid / Court action / UnpaidDEFRA – Litter / 7565 / 3871 / 266 / 3428
DEFRA - Dog fouling / 2742 / 2008 / 193 / 541
4.5The number of officers authorised to issue FPNs in other authorities varies. Christchurch for example only has their dog warden authorised, North Dorset’s Environmental Health team is authorised while Southampton have 14 dedicated officers. It is proposed that all of the current officers authorised in E&CPS will gain authorisation to issue FPNs. Dedicated enforcement exercises will be supplemented by on going day to day activity conducted during the course of officers core business.
4.6FPN’s can be served on the basis of witness statements provided by other officers of the council (e.g. Open Spaces Rangers) or members of the public. In order to maximise the impact on priority crimes it is proposed that officers from related units (Leisure, Transportation, Housing and Community, PHP) are trained to gather basic evidence and that this is provided to E&CPS. As the lead unit E&CPS will then process the FPN on behalf of the authority.
4.7There would be a need to provide administrative support to administer any FPN’s although this additional resource is not predictable at this stage. If this proved significant due to the number of FPN’s issued then income generated could be used to fund the additional support.
4.8Officers have recently witnessed littering from cars, especially cigarette ends, the use of fixed penalties would assist in this enforcement as the law is worded to enable an FPN to be issued when an officer has reason to believe an offence has been committed rather than having to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
4.9In considering the benefits of FPN’s, Members should be aware that for a considerable period a policy of prosecution of offenders for incidents of dog fouling, littering, and duty of care offences has been in place. In that time virtually all observed contraventions have resulted in prosecution. The statistics for the last five years are shown below. These have attracted considerable publicity and community support. Media coverage strengthens the Council’s ‘Pride in Poole’ message. If the number of FPN’s served are significant this will serve to further emphasise the importance of this – see figures below for first 3 months of 2005-06.
2001-02 / 2002-03 / 2003-04 / 2004-05 / 2005-06Dog Fouling / 1 / 3 / 9 / 1 / 5*
Littering / 0 / 4 / 0 / 1 / 16*
Fly Tipping / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 2*
*Pending
5PUBLICITY – CONSULTATION
5.1A number of Councils report that consultation notices in newspapers, for the statutory period, were the only consultations that were carried out prior to the use of FPN’s.
5.2The Poole Opinion Panel has already verified public support for strong action on enviro crimes. On going educational events led by the Pride in Poole campaign can supplement the statutory notification to ensure that residents are advised well in advance of the actual implementation.
6FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
6.1The costs of setting up and administering the scheme are likely to off set or exceed any income generated. Whilst service pressures will be created in terms of training and administration, internal management of the changes will absorb these. If a significant number of FPN’s are issued, then the income generated can be used to support the on going costs.
6.2The current Flare database used for recording and monitoring complaints and requests can be used and adapted to record/monitor/track the various stages of a FPN when it is issued. Reports on the number of FPNs issued, paid, unpaid and that led to prosecution will be able to be generated to comply with DEFRA requirement to report figures to them.
6.3Officers would need to have updated training that would incorporate the way the initial information is gathered and then tracking the progress of the FPN. It is suggested that FPN’s will be issued by post with only names and addresses established in the field. Checks would then be made back at the office to verify the persons identity and the FPN would then be issued. As a result the number of none payments should be reduced and the risks to officer’s health and safety will be minimised.
7RECOMMENDATION
7.1That FPN’s are introduced within the Borough of Poole for a wide range of enviro crimes.
7.2That prosecution is retained as an essential tool for cases where FPN’s do not succeed or are inappropriate
7.3It is suggested that an ideal time for the introduction of FPNs would coincide with the enactment of the majority of the parts of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act in April 2006. This would coincide with the extended range of offences becoming available together with the freedom to set the level for FPN’s. This will also permit adequate time for training, implementing procedures and conducting extensive publicity campaigns.
7.4It is proposed that there are annual reviews of the system if it is introduced, to take into account changes in legislation or to improve the efficiency of the process.
Shaun Robson
Head of Environmental and Consumer Protection Services
Contact Officer:Shaun Robson
Telephone No.:01202 261700