Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I take my grandchildren to school some mornings and the pavements around the school are disgusting.

Then blame the parents, for letting their kiddies crap all over the pavement.

Why can they not be taught to do it in the gutter, as they do in India?

[teaboy2]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

What law(s) do you believe would have been broken if mio rather than her dog had (allegedly) shat on the pavement?

Thats a good point. I know you can get an FPN for urinating, but not seen or heard anything about pooing in public lol.

[Tools]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I would also suggest that, as well as the bodycam footage, you request the CCTV footage from the park, this would prove/disprove whether or not your dog ( or someone elses) was responsible.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Repealed in 2005.



Totally agree with you. To me there was no evidence just a false accusation by the CEO against Mia

Just replaced by other measures but still in place until they take over, but still a criminal act punishable via a fine.
http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/NR/rdonl...egislation.pdf


Section 55 – Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act (CNEA) 2005
The above legislation has repealed the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996. Dog fouling can now be
regulated by way of Dog Control Orders. Local authorities can designate areas of land and make a
Dog Control Order to apply to that land
This system of Dog Control Orders replaces that of making by‐laws or designations under the now
repealed Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996. By‐Laws and Local Acts of Parliament can continue to have
effect until such a time as a Dog Control Order is made.
Breach of an order may be prosecuted in court to a maximum of a Level 3 fine (£1000) or dealt with
by means of a Fixed Penalty.

There has to be a criminal statutory basis for a fine to be imposed teaboy. You cannot have a civil fine.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Does the Border Agency know about Citizen "Genghis" Khan? :grin:

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I would also suggest that, as well as the bodycam footage, you request the CCTV footage from the park, this would prove/disprove whether or not your dog ( or someone elses) was responsible.

That assumes it has not (conveniently) disappeared.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Breach of an order may be prosecuted in court to a maximum of a Level 3 fine (£1000) or dealt with by means of a Fixed Penalty.

Is it an arrestable offence, as it would have been under section 46(3) (link) of the Police Reform Act 2002 if Genghis Khan had overstated his powers?

[teaboy2]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Just replaced by other measures but still in place until they take over, but still a criminal act punishable via a fine.
http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/NR/rdonl...egislation.pdf


Section 55 – Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act (CNEA) 2005
The above legislation has repealed the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996. Dog fouling can now be
regulated by way of Dog Control Orders. Local authorities can designate areas of land and make a
Dog Control Order to apply to that land
This system of Dog Control Orders replaces that of making by‐laws or designations under the now
repealed Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996. By‐Laws and Local Acts of Parliament can continue to have
effect until such a time as a Dog Control Order is made.
Breach of an order may be prosecuted in court to a maximum of a Level 3 fine (£1000) or dealt with
by means of a Fixed Penalty.

There has to be a criminal statutory basis for a fine to be imposed teaboy. You cannot have a civil fine.

I never said you coud have a civil fine. But then a fixed Penalty Notice is not a fine, is it! Nor is it registered (where as a fine is) against the person the FPN is issued too!!

Also 2005 act is in force. And no not punishable as a crime. Whats punishable is non payment of FPN where you have not opted for a court hearing (This is your statutory basis andy), which can lead to a 50% increase and/or fine. At this point it becomes criminal, and non payment of Fine can lead to further conviction.

Its also not a crime unless you are found guilty of it, not guilty means no crime committed by the accused! Most councils prefer the FPN route than instant prosecution (its the council that prosecutes), as obviously FPN is near instant profit with no need to answer to a judge.

As said before, the argument as to whether its civil or criminal is not relevant to the OP. No FPN was issued to her, so nothing for her to answer too. Its the actions and false allegations of the CEO, along with the council refusing to release the body cam footage despite the OP being the data subject, that is being questioned here.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Not sure what you are trying to say here teaboy, the act of allowing your dog to foul is a crime punishable by a fine of upto £1000. According to the CPS anyway.

A fine is a criminal punishment. If you pay a fixed penalty you waive your right to a trial, that is all.



I

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I never said you coud have a civil fine. But then a fixed Penalty Notice is not a fine, is it! .

Sorry din't answer this

A FPN may only be issued where an officer has reason to believe a person has committed a penalty offence and there is sufficient evidence with to support a successful prosecution.
A FPN will be appropriate for first-time offenders as it is a low-level disposal and the recipient can avoid obtaining a conviction. It will also be appropriate because of the extreme improbability that a person once seen committing an offence would be seen on a subsequent occasion, and such an event, that there would be any record, or any accessible record, of a previous warning (which may have been given by another agency). A FPN may be an appropriate response where a warning or a caution might be used.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I wouldn't read too much into legislation that allows FPNs to be issued. There is a very strong argument that such measures breach a person's right -

• to be considered innocent until proven guilty;
• to know the nature of the allegations being made against them;
• to challenge those allegations;
• to have the allegations tried by a court or legally-convened tribunal
• to not be accused of an offence when no offence exists

These rights are contained within Article 6 of ECHR and enshrined within the Human Rights Act 1998. Section 6 of the Act makes it unlawful for a public authority, which includes any central or local government agency, council, department or ministry, commercial entity or person whose function is that of a public nature, including acting on behalf of a public authority, to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.

Politicians often come up with legislation which sounds as if it was cobbled together during a House of Commons tea-break and written down on the back of a cigarette packet. I can see a lot of Dog Poo and Litter Stazi joining the JSA Club sometime soon. People have had enough of the bullying, corruption, fraud and lies by politicians at both local and national level and I can see the likes of Citizen Khan being an early casualty of the inevitable clampdown on out-of-control officials, private security and the civil enforcement industry.

[teaboy2]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Not sure what you are trying to say here teaboy, the act of allowing your dog to foul is a crime punishable by a fine of upto £1000. According to the CPS anyway.

A fine is a criminal punishment. If you pay a fixed penalty you waive your right to a trial, that is all.



I

No wrong. Dog fouling is not a criminal offence it's a civil offence between you and the owner of the land who has introduced a dog control order. The offence is non payment of the FPN, or are you trying to tell us all the parking on a land owners land without a permit/ticket is also a criminal offence, as you get FPNS for that too from the councils. Same in some areas where you leave your car engine ticking over, is that a crime too.

The offence regarding dog fouling does not occur until the person issued with a FPN either does not pay and fails to opt to have it heard in court within the time-frame allowed. Once the FPN is paid, the recipient discharges all liability and therefore no offence has occurred! If they fail to pay or opt to court, then the FPN is enforced the same way as any other FPN (Paying of a FPN is not an admission of guilt, nor does issuing one or paying one count as a criminal conviction for a criminal offence)

As for your other post regarding issuing of FPN on first offence. Sorry but do we see people parking without permit/ticket getting just 1 FPN and then getting taken straight to court? Nope. Yes a council may prosecute you instead of giving you an FPN for dog fouling, but they would need evidence the feaces came from your dog, as hearsay from a CEO is not enough.

If a shoplifter is prosecuted by a store, is it a civil prosecution, yes it is.

Same for councils, land owners, company's that issued dog control orders. In order for it to be a criminal prosecution then the dog owner would have to be prosecuted by the government/crown, by trial - But its not the government/crown that is prosecuting you, its the local council, land owner or company. It is the subsequent court trial that determines if you have committed an civil offence of dog fouling, should you opt to have a court hearing (in which case the FPN is usually increased by 50%), and/or if you have committed a criminal offence for not paying the FPN whilst not opting for court hearing within the time-frame permitted (its only when you fail to pay and fail to opt for court hearing when it becomes a criminal matter). Said court may then fine you, and order you to pay compensation to the party prosecuting you as remittance.

Why do you think it is only those that failed to pay and failed to opt to go to court within the allowed time frame, are the ones that we hear are prosecuted in the news. Where those that opt for court we hear nothing about in the news regardless of the outcome?!! Its because the latter is not a criminal offence, but a civil one.

Now for the third time. Whether its criminal or not is not relevant to the thread since no FPN was issued!!

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

No wrong. Dog fouling is not a criminal offence it's a civil offence

duplicate post

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

[QUOTE=teaboy2;407415]No wrong. Dog fouling is not a criminal offence /QUOTE]

This is a quote from the CPS

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/o...e_animals/#a04

Where a dog defecates on land designated under the Act by a local authority the person (other than a registered blind person) in charge of the dog commits a summary offence if he fails to remove the faeces forthwith, see section 3 Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996 (Stones 8-26731

Do you really need me to go into the intricacies of parking enforcement, and go even more off topic?

Simply this is an offence, not a civil offence a criminal offence, the same as most parking/ motoring offences(unless they have been decriminalized), these can be settled by the payment of a fixed penalty prior to enforcement, but the offence has to be committed, there has to be a reasonable chance of successful criminal prosecution before a FPN is issued.

When a shop takes an action against a shop-lifter it is on the basis of losses uncured due to a tort, there is no fine, it is an action for damages.(Unless the police decide to get involved and take action for criminal theft.)

As usual you made an error, and instead of just holding your hands up and saying, look I made a mistake , you seek to confuse the issue with other nonsense.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I wouldn't read too much into legislation that allows FPNs to be issued. There is a very strong argument that such measures breach a person's right -

• to be considered innocent until proven guilty;
• to know the nature of the allegations being made against them;
• to challenge those allegations;
• to have the allegations tried by a court or legally-convened tribunal
• to not be accused of an offence when no offence exists

These rights are contained within Article 6 of ECHR and enshrined within the Human Rights Act 1998. Section 6 of the Act makes it unlawful for a public authority, which includes any central or local government agency, council, department or ministry, commercial entity or person whose function is that of a public nature, including acting on behalf of a public authority, to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.

Politicians often come up with legislation which sounds as if it was cobbled together during a House of Commons tea-break and written down on the back of a cigarette packet. I can see a lot of Dog Poo and Litter Stazi joining the JSA Club sometime soon. People have had enough of the bullying, corruption, fraud and lies by politicians at both local and national level and I can see the likes of Citizen Khan being an early casualty of the inevitable clampdown on out-of-control officials, private security and the civil enforcement industry.

Yes I have heard this said, and it is a valid point however. If it were me that was caught committing an offence I would rather pay a reduced fine and and get it over with than have to go through court case and end up with a criminal record.

But the point is that the offence has to be committed before any of this can happen. If the suspect disputes the offence then they do not pay the ticket and they get to state their case in court. This is not civil procedure, and will not occur in your local county court.