PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Littering/Council/Court Summons etc
DepricatedZero
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 17:06
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



Hello, here on recommendation from the internet in general! I know you guys have had a few of these to deal with, and I did search first but none of them seem to really match mine so I'm starting this thread about it, I hope someone can help a little.

Back in either Oct or Nov 2018 (it was 3 days after this new legislation or whatever it is came into effect) a newly recruited Sherlock Holmes wet himself with excitement when he saw me drop a cigarette butt in Morrisons car park. Usual nonsense ensued, warned me he was recording on his "don't hurt me" bodycam etc. I hadn't even closed the car door at this point. He said demanded ID and said he wasn't going to take any further action so I expected to just get shoved in the system so I could be fined one million pounds if caught doing it again etc, but no, he lied and issued a ticket. I challenged him on this and he just mumbled, there were two other people with me who heard him say he did not intend to take any action, so he lied to get me to admit liability. Anyway, fuming I contacted Morrisons (who didn't seem impressed), the council who told me to contact District Enforcement. So I did. I phoned them demanding the video footage (if it existed) and they told me to email them (weirdly at a council email domain) so I did, I made sure to save a copy of this email. Never heard a whisper.

Here we are 13 March 2019 and I've just discovered (this is my fault) an unopened court summons issued in January and I was due to appear in court on 14/02/2019 about this matter. I'm a bit gutted I missed it because I really wanted to go to court over this. But here we are a month after I was supposed to appear in court and I haven't heard anything regarding it, no post, phone calls, emails, nobody has come to arrest me, nothing. And I've double checked every item of mail from between then and now and there has been nothing.

How long would it typically take to hear something about the missed court date? Should I do anything?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 17:06
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 20:29
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,278
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Call the court first thing in the morning and find out what happened at the hearing on 14 February. Don't panic if they say you've been convicted in your absence, as there's a way to have the court case reset if you didn't know about the hearing.

However nothing you've said so far amounts to a defence to the underlying offence.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:01
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



I'm not really concerned with, or trying to defend the underlying offence. It really makes no difference to me whether they find me guilty or not because nothing that happens will make me pay any fine. What I'm interested in doing is exposing the dishonest tactics being used to rake in money. And also whether it's normal to have heard nothing about a missed court appearance a month later, been a long time since I've had anything to do with the court system so I kinda forget how it goes.

This post has been edited by DepricatedZero: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:13
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:25
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,722
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:01) *
nothing that happens will make me pay any fine.


People often say that until the bailiffs come knocking...

QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:01) *
And also whether it's normal to have heard nothing about a missed court appearance a month later,


As suggested, phone the court.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 23:51
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,278
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 22:01) *
I'm not really concerned with, or trying to defend the underlying offence. It really makes no difference to me whether they find me guilty or not because nothing that happens will make me pay any fine. What I'm interested in doing is exposing the dishonest tactics being used to rake in money. And also whether it's normal to have heard nothing about a missed court appearance a month later, been a long time since I've had anything to do with the court system so I kinda forget how it goes.

You misunderstand, this is not a civil matter. Littering is a criminal offence, see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/87, the council will have prosecuted you criminally in the magistrates' court.

For criminal fines, there are powers of entry that include the use of force (i.e. enforcement agents, HMCTS officers or police can physically smash the door down if you don't open), your goods can (and will) be taken to be auctioned off and if you have no goods worth taking and still don't pay, you will ultimately be arrested and taken before the magistrates' where you will have to explain why you haven't paid, and why you shouldn't be sent to prison. Any arguments about "dishonest" tactics used to raise the money will hold no weight as they won't look behind the conviction at that point. I hope you realise this is serious and you need to deal with it properly or it could all end in tears.

If you haven't heard anything, there's a fair chance the case might have been adjourned (in which case there will be no conviction yet), so I suggest you call the court first thing and find out what happened. If you were convicted in your absence, you can then file a statutory declaration to have the conviction set aside, providing you do so promptly.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:14
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 23:51) *
If you haven't heard anything, there's a fair chance the case might have been adjourned (in which case there will be no conviction yet), so I suggest you call the court first thing and find out what happened. If you were convicted in your absence, you can then file a statutory declaration to have the conviction set aside, providing you do so promptly.


This is useful information so thank you for addressing the relevant point. Would I expect to have heard anything by now if the case had been adjourned? We're a month to the day and I've heard literally nothing about this matter in that time. What I'm wondering is, given that they won't accept "I just didn't open the envelope" as a legit reason for not attending court (which is fair enough) am I better served by lying to them and saying I didn't receive it at all? It seems that if I admit I did get it but just didn't open it I'm providing them a line of argumentation for not having the case reopened, which I don't want to do. If I maintain that I didn't receive it at all this seems a more plausible reason for not attending. It wasn't sent recorded or anything so it seems denial of receipt at all is unfalsifiable and would go more in my favour.

I'm thinking if I let sleeping dogs lie and don't hear anything then that seems like a good enough outcome, if I do hear something I can then deny getting any summons and have the case reopened at that time. Is it possible the case was thrown out? I'm aware that in some of these cases the Council don't bother to attend because they hadn't bargained on anyone pushing it as far as court (they're relying on bullying tactics to get people to just cough up) and so there is no case to answer. If this were the case would I expect any kind of notification do you think?

Also one more quick thing, is this normal procedure? I mean the ticket was issued back in either Oct or Nov (I have it here somewhere) and I've heard nothing about it since, no "oi you haven't paid" or "you're fine's gone up because you haven't paid" or "this is your last chance before we take you to court" etc etc, literally the only communication I've had from anybody about this has been the court summons. Is this normal?

This post has been edited by DepricatedZero: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:39
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:38
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,278
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:14) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 13 Mar 2019 - 23:51) *
If you haven't heard anything, there's a fair chance the case might have been adjourned (in which case there will be no conviction yet), so I suggest you call the court first thing and find out what happened. If you were convicted in your absence, you can then file a statutory declaration to have the conviction set aside, providing you do so promptly.


This is useful information so thank you for addressing the relevant point. Would I expect to have heard anything by now if the case had been adjourned? We're a month to the day and I've heard literally nothing about this matter in that time. What I'm wondering is, given that they won't accept "I just didn't open the envelope" as a legit reason for not attending court (which is fair enough) am I better served by lying to them and saying I didn't receive it at all?

If you lie in a statutory declaration, you commit a much more serious offence that can result in up to two years in prison: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/1-2/6/section/5
The authorities are known to monitor this site and we have a special review section for people who have adopted this sort of tactic, I imagine you don't want to end up on this list: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=120923

QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:14) *
It seems that if I admit I did get it but just didn't open it I'm providing them a line of argumentation for not having the case reopened, which I don't want to do. If I maintain that I didn't receive it at all this seems a more plausible reason for not attending. It wasn't sent recorded or anything so it seems denial of receipt at all is unfalsifiable and would go more in my favour.

If a statutory declaration is made within the deadline, it's automatically accepted, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/14
You found out about the court case on 13 March so your deadline is 3 April. However at present you don't even know if a conviction has occurred so I suggest you find out.

QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 12:14) *
I'm thinking if I let sleeping dogs lie and don't hear anything then that seems like a good enough outcome, if I do hear something I can then deny getting any summons and have the case reopened at that time. Is it possible the case was thrown out? I'm aware that in some of these cases the Council don't bother to attend because they hadn't bargained on anyone pushing it as far as court (they're relying on bullying tactics to get people to just cough up) and so there is no case to answer. If this were the case would I expect any kind of notification do you think?

It is possible the case was thrown out, who knows? However as I've explained, if you make a statutory declaration after 3 April, the court has a discretion to accept it or not and as you obviously could make a statutory declaration now, you will have no good reason to justify the delay. You've admitted on a public forum that you found out about the proceedings on 13 March and if you lie about this in a statutory declaration, you run the very real risk of ending up in prison. Given that a statutory declaration before 3 April would be 1) truthful and 2) accepted automatically, I suggest there's no reason to delay.

Considering you have a risk free opportunity to find out what's happened, and get any conviction set aside automatically upon making a statutory declaration, I suggest you call the court pronto.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 13:07
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



Ok all that seems fine, what do you think about the last question though? The one about is it normal to not hear anything at all and then get slapped with a summons? Aren't some sort of letters meant to be sent in between the deadline to pay the ticket and being hauled up before the beak?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 13:30
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,130
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 13:07) *
Ok all that seems fine, what do you think about the last question though? The one about is it normal to not hear anything at all and then get slapped with a summons? Aren't some sort of letters meant to be sent in between the deadline to pay the ticket and being hauled up before the beak?

Some criminal offences can be disposed of without a prosecution, often by way of fixed penalty. However, such matters can proceed straight to court - there's no defence here. (Whereas certain procedural improprieties can render decriminalised offences void)


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 14:14
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



Well, what a peculiar turn of events! Rang the court as advised and was told nothing happened on the day due to an admin error wherein a whole "batch" of summonses were reissued due to no one being sure if they'd been issued in the first place or not! And, the new summons has just arrived!

So I'm now waiting for a callback from the company tasked with issuing these fines to explain to me why nobody answered my email back in SEPTEMBER regarding this issue, as I was told by the company to email them to request the footage of the events on the day. I have the email in my sent folder so there is no question as to whether I attempted to deal with the matter as it was sent on the same day the FPN was issued. Let's see if they call back.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 16:35
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,130
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



It’s all very interesting but I think you are somehow thinking it gives you a defence?

If a fixed penalty was offered then you may convince the bench (if found guilty/plead guilty) to sentence at an equivalent rate (as there appears to have been administrative difficulties unrelated to the offence itself).


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 16:49
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



Nah it's not that I think it gives me an advantage, it's just a bit bizarre it turned out that way, stroke of luck probably. So anyway, bit of an update. The company did call back and said they couldn't find my email (shock) and asked me to forward it, which I did. However, a different address was given and when asked about it the lady said the email address had changed... ok.

So I also called Morrisons, who confirm that they own the car park and that they have received several complaints regarding these "enforcement" officers, to the extent that they have been told to leave and not return. After a bit of digging around it appears that where private property (which is open to the air but to which the public has access, IE Morrisons car park) then permission is required from the land owner or other relevant person in charge in order for them to issue FPN's. It seems they don't have this permission explicitly or implicitly as any implied permission has been withdrawn in that they have been told to leave and stop harrassing their customers. Whether this could be argued in retrospect or not is probably another matter as this happened after my encounter.

I asked a few other questions too, namely who is responsible for the clearing up of any litter deposited in the car park and I was informed that it's Morrisons' own staff. It seems odd that the council can enforce littering penalties on land where they a) have not obtained permission to do so and b) aren't responsible for clearing up litter in the first place. It'll be interesting to see what happens in court on the day. No doubt I'll lose but I'll have a damn good go.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:12
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,148
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



FWIW the law [Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 87] says

"(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he throws down, drops or otherwise deposits any litter in any place to which this section applies and leaves it.

(2)This section applies to any place in the area of a principal litter authority which is open to the air, subject to subsection (3) below.

(3)This section does not apply to a place which is “open to the air” for the purposes of this Part by virtue of section 86(13) above if the public does not have access to it, with or without payment."

so it seems clear that the offence was committed, regardless of what Morrisons may think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:20
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



QUOTE (666 @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:12) *
FWIW the law [Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 87] says

"(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he throws down, drops or otherwise deposits any litter in any place to which this section applies and leaves it.

(2)This section applies to any place in the area of a principal litter authority which is open to the air, subject to subsection (3) below.

(3)This section does not apply to a place which is “open to the air” for the purposes of this Part by virtue of section 86(13) above if the public does not have access to it, with or without payment."

so it seems clear that the offence was committed, regardless of what Morrisons may think.



Yes indeed, there seem to be a few contradictions between that and a few other sources. Guidance states the following -

Issuing FPNs on private land
Before you enter private land to issue FPNs, you should consider whether to get consent, because you don’t have statutory powers of entry in this situation.

This applies to privately owned land which the public can access.

The only exception is for waste collection authorities investigating fly-tipping. They can enter private land without permission.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/enforcement-off...on-private-land
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darkatmosphere
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:21
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 82
Joined: 30 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,643



I think people are assuming this land is PLA land, perhaps its not as the OP has said its morrisons land and the are responsible for it in regards to litter, therefore EPA 1990 doesn't apply here, this ticket is not in the jurisdiction of the PLA contractors enforcement realms, so in my interpretation any prosecution must fail.

If I am, wrong then apologies, but this is how I have interpreted the situation.

This post has been edited by Darkatmosphere: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:25


--------------------
There are a lot of laws in this country, but there isn't any justice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:25
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,354
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:20) *
QUOTE (666 @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:12) *
FWIW the law [Environmental Protection Act 1990, section 87] says

"(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he throws down, drops or otherwise deposits any litter in any place to which this section applies and leaves it.

(2)This section applies to any place in the area of a principal litter authority which is open to the air, subject to subsection (3) below.

(3)This section does not apply to a place which is “open to the air” for the purposes of this Part by virtue of section 86(13) above if the public does not have access to it, with or without payment."

so it seems clear that the offence was committed, regardless of what Morrisons may think.



Yes indeed, there seem to be a few contradictions between that and a few other sources. Guidance states the following -

Issuing FPNs on private land
Before you enter private land to issue FPNs, you should consider whether to get consent, because you don’t have statutory powers of entry in this situation.

This applies to privately owned land which the public can access.

The only exception is for waste collection authorities investigating fly-tipping. They can enter private land without permission.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/enforcement-off...on-private-land

The lack of a statutory power of entry is not the same as not having a power to issue an FPN.

If there is no power of entry then the warden could seek to rely on an implied permission to enter. Even if no implied permission was present (i.e. it had been explicitly withdrawn) then that would make him a trespasser but it’s then reaching to suggest that this would render any FPN issued unlawful - perhaps someone has an authority on that point?

Even if the FPN was unlawfully issued that doesn’t per se prevent any prosecution for the offence for which the FPN was issued.

In short, I don’t see how the above helps you.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 17:51
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



I do understand where you're coming from Southpaw, but what I posted seems relevant. Private land, even where the public have access (so Morrisons car park easily qualifies under this) the LA are required to gain permission to issue FPN's. They either have this permission or they do not have it. So far it seems that they don't, if they do then they can produce it in court.

I don't really see the implied consent here either, I mean where when and in what way was it implied that they have the consent of the land owner? I don't see that "the land owner didn't tell us not to" is an argument as by this logic me vandalising your property or doing anything to you for that matter is justified on the basis that you didn't tell me not to. It makes more sense that consent is not granted until such a time as it is granted, rather than granted until such a time as it is withdrawn. I'm no expert but if they don't have this consent then I agree with Darkatmosphere (cool name btw) - this prosecution should not succeed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 18:35
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,354
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



I don't see any reference in what you posted to requiring consent to issue an FPN. The consent is required in order to enter the land as (subject to the exceptions you have identified) they have no power of entry. Implied consent would be the consent that everyone has to enter a supermarket carpark - by its very nature the implication is that the occupier wants people there.

You've not addressed the issue that even if the FPN was issued unlawfully (which is far from established) then that doesn't prevent a prosecution for an underlying offence of littering. If you don't pay the FPN and they institute proceedings against you for the underlying offence the FPN ceases to have any relevance to your innocence or guilt.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DepricatedZero
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 19:08
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,900



"Before you enter private land to issue FPN's"

The issue here isn't whether they are allowed to enter private land - it's whethere they are allowed to issue FPN's on that land.

Of course they're allowed to be on that land as it's a supermarket car park, the same as you or I are allowed on it, this guidance refers to whether they can issue FPN's on it and it clearly states they need consent to do so. From this, and in reply to your second question, if they had no consent to issue an FPN on that land then the FPN is invalid in that it was issued unlawfully (might be too strong a word but you know what I mean) - therefore the prosecution surely fails as there is no plaintiff. If the land owner themselves wished to prosecute me for this offence I'm sure they could do so but it isn't them taking me on, it's the LA. If the LA can't (properly) issue FPN's there as they don't have consent to do so then there can be no case to answer.

This is the best way I can put it really. If it turns out they DO have consent all this falls apart, but if they don't I'll fight it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 19:41
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,354
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (DepricatedZero @ Thu, 14 Mar 2019 - 19:08) *
"Before you enter private land to issue FPN's"


No - your own quote says "because you don’t have statutory powers of entry in this situation". Clearly, it is a reference to a power to enter the land since no power to enter without consent exists.

QUOTE
The issue here isn't whether they are allowed to enter private land - it's whethere they are allowed to issue FPN's on that land.


Again, no. Whilst in theory there might be some argument that their permission to be on the land was conditional (i.e. "you can enter the land but you're not allowed to issue FPNs") that seems highly unlikely. There is no power under the relevant Act for anyone to prohibit an authorised officer from issuing an FPN, so clearly they don't require anyone's permission to do so. The issue is, very clearly, whether they are entitled to enter onto private land and not whether they are allowed to issue FPNs.

QUOTE
it clearly states they need consent to do so.


No, it doesn't - see above.

QUOTE
From this, and in reply to your second question, if they had no consent to issue an FPN on that land then the FPN is invalid in that it was issued unlawfully (might be too strong a word but you know what I mean)


I don't know what you mean - the FPN was either issued lawfully or it was not. If they were trespassing then you might have an argument that any FPN issued was issued unlawfully but I don't think it's a very good one.

QUOTE
- therefore the prosecution surely fails as there is no plaintiff.


What has a plaintiff got to do with it?

QUOTE
If the land owner themselves wished to prosecute me for this offence I'm sure they could do so


Absent any restriction in the Act anyone can do so.

QUOTE
but it isn't them taking me on, it's the LA. If the LA can't (properly) issue FPN's there as they don't have consent to do so then there can be no case to answer.


You're still missing the point on what they need consent for. However, even if the FPN was issued unlawfully you wouldn't be prosecuted for not paying the [unlawfully issued] FPN - you'd be prosecuted for the littering offence. So, the fact that the FPN was, in your hypothesis, unlawfully issued is irrelevant. The enforcement officer can still give evidence of your littering and the court can still convict you.

QUOTE
This is the best way I can put it really.


You are under a serious misapprehension as to the law. You've come here for advice and you're getting it. Of course, you're free to ignore it.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 21st March 2019 - 12:57
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.