Private/Council Litter Police - powers to arrest or detain?
Discussion
La Liga said:
2Btoo said:
La Liga said:
kiethton said:
How are they going to verify the name you give, surely you'd just give them a moody one?
You can, but the encounters are recorded so you risk ending up in court and receiving a much larger fine / criminal record. (To do so is surely no more than to reply 'Jo Bloggs' should a random man on the street ask who you are).
Obviously if there's no legal power there's no obligation.
One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
footnote said:
If they are an 'authorised officer' - and I think they were, and I would expect the Councils to want them to be 'authorised officers' what steps would they follow if people did refuse to give a name?
One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
The area of law we're talking about is quite convoluted with designated powers / community accreditation schemes etc. One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
Without trawling through it, I think the following is correct:
If they request your name and address you are obligated to provide it. You are under no obligation to remain there nor do they have the power to prevent you from leaving / to detain you.
Upon not providing your name and address, either through refusing to / giving false details or practically walking away, then you commit an offence. It would then come down to the the LA to try and identify who you are and start Magistrates' court proceedings through their legal department - they may have civil options available (County court) but I am unsure about this. Primarily this would be from the body cameras but the question is who will be able to ID you?
Obviously they're free to call the police, but whether or not such a minor matter is going to get any sort of prompt attendance is another matter.
La Liga said:
footnote said:
If they are an 'authorised officer' - and I think they were, and I would expect the Councils to want them to be 'authorised officers' what steps would they follow if people did refuse to give a name?
One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
The area of law we're talking about is quite convoluted with designated powers / community accreditation schemes etc. One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
Without trawling through it, I think the following is correct:
If they request your name and address you are obligated to provide it. You are under no obligation to remain there nor do they have the power to prevent you from leaving / to detain you.
Upon not providing your name and address, either through refusing to / giving false details or practically walking away, then you commit an offence. It would then come down to the the LA to try and identify who you are and start Magistrates' court proceedings through their legal department - they may have civil options available (County court) but I am unsure about this. Primarily this would be from the body cameras but the question is who will be able to ID you?
Obviously they're free to call the police, but whether or not such a minor matter is going to get any sort of prompt attendance is another matter.
Assuming they are an 'authorised officer' and that a person commits an offence by refusing or giving false details - and then attempts to walk away but is, for example, restrained by the 'authorised officer' placing a hand on their shoulder to stop them leaving while he phones the police.
Has the 'authorised officer' then exceeded their 'authorisation'?
Does exceeding their authorisation then constitute an offence?
I suppose in theory it could deteriorate rapidly into a fight and or a he said/she said and then the police would probably be called by someone else.
I would have thought that a police officer would be required in order to detain someone for refusal of details (apologies if I overlooked you saying that already)
footnote said:
[Thanks for that.
Assuming they are an 'authorised officer' and that a person commits an offence by refusing or giving false details - and then attempts to walk away but is, for example, restrained by the 'authorised officer' placing a hand on their shoulder to stop them leaving while he phones the police.
Has the 'authorised officer' then exceeded their 'authorisation'?
Does exceeding their authorisation then constitute an offence?
I suppose in theory it could deteriorate rapidly into a fight and or a he said/she said and then the police would probably be called by someone else.
I would have thought that a police officer would be required in order to detain someone for refusal of details (apologies if I overlooked you saying that already)
You're welcome. Assuming they are an 'authorised officer' and that a person commits an offence by refusing or giving false details - and then attempts to walk away but is, for example, restrained by the 'authorised officer' placing a hand on their shoulder to stop them leaving while he phones the police.
Has the 'authorised officer' then exceeded their 'authorisation'?
Does exceeding their authorisation then constitute an offence?
I suppose in theory it could deteriorate rapidly into a fight and or a he said/she said and then the police would probably be called by someone else.
I would have thought that a police officer would be required in order to detain someone for refusal of details (apologies if I overlooked you saying that already)
Using force to stop someone leaving by the enforcement officer would be an assault.
If a police officer attends and suspects and offence has been committed e.g. littering and / or refusing to give details to the authorised officer then they could make an arrest based on needing to confirm the litterer's identity.
If I knew anyone who had to resort to an arrest for littering I'd nominate them for a bun fine i.e. the shift vote if that person has to bring cakes / buns into the next briefing. Other bun fine offences are being late, crashing cars, losing prisoners, accepting false details, losing warrant cards etc.
I don't like littering whether it be paper, cigarettes or chewing gum and it would be good to stop it, but I've often seen these 'litter inspectors' around city centres and wondered what exactly they would/could do if the litter dropper they approach just ignored them or told them to F' off?
La Liga said:
footnote said:
If they are an 'authorised officer' - and I think they were, and I would expect the Councils to want them to be 'authorised officers' what steps would they follow if people did refuse to give a name?
One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
The area of law we're talking about is quite convoluted with designated powers / community accreditation schemes etc. One of the 'characters' in Panorama said he often pretended to phone the police and that usually persuaded the person to give their name and/or pay the fine.
How long could an 'authorised officer' legally detain a member of the public and what steps could they take to enforce that detention? Coul they physically restrain them if they attempted to walk off? Or like the woman in the 'poo video' will the 'authorised officer' just follow them ?
What if the police don't turn up? I think the 'authorised officer' on Panorama only ever 'pretended' to phone the police because he suspected the police (having more serious crimes to investigate) would tell him to 'leave it' if he really phoned them.
Without trawling through it, I think the following is correct:
If they request your name and address you are obligated to provide it. You are under no obligation to remain there nor do they have the power to prevent you from leaving / to detain you.
Upon not providing your name and address, either through refusing to / giving false details or practically walking away, then you commit an offence. It would then come down to the the LA to try and identify who you are and start Magistrates' court proceedings through their legal department - they may have civil options available (County court) but I am unsure about this. Primarily this would be from the body cameras but the question is who will be able to ID you?
Obviously they're free to call the police, but whether or not such a minor matter is going to get any sort of prompt attendance is another matter.
Don't worry Kingdom will soon be getting its contract cancelled the council can't be se n to be condoning that.
Don't worry though I'm sure the next company they employ will have exactly the same staff working for them as Kingdom rename themselves.
t
ts.
Having called the police out before for a minor issue and being told it would be 24 hours I wonder how fast they would turn up for these.
Don't worry though I'm sure the next company they employ will have exactly the same staff working for them as Kingdom rename themselves.
t
ts. Having called the police out before for a minor issue and being told it would be 24 hours I wonder how fast they would turn up for these.
KevinCamaroSS said:
I doubt very much that littering is an offence subject to an arrest, therefore you could not be detained.
There is no such thing as arrestable and non arrestable offences anymore. Every offence is arrestable (Providing certain criteria is met) Littering will be arrestable as will failing to give your name to an enforcement officer as detailed in law here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/16/sectio...
The arrest necessity would be name & address unknown or doubted. Police will search the individual after arrest and most probably find a wallet with their name & address then the necessity is no longer met as they have their name or if they decide to give their name they will be de-arrested.
The average Joe Bloggs couldn't arrest or detain as it's a summary only offence.
Whether the Police had any resources however to come out to such an event is another matter. It certainly wouldn't be a blue light run!
Boosted LS1 said:
They're civilians like you or I so have no powers to detain for a littering offence imo. All they can do is follow you and hope a PC arrives. I don't think PCSO's can detain you either.
I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
I thought Court Bailiffs were authorised / licenced by the High Court and had powers of entry and also seizure with the law behind them. .I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
Debt Collection agents are private companies and are the ones with the dodgy tactics. The only TV programme I've seen with actual Bailiffs is The Sheriffs Are Coming. So the ones in 'can't pay' are just collection agents. Stand to be corrected though.
They (Kingdom) have just started in Burnley, one of the girls that worked with us applied to them, the application was something else. They wanted to know hair colour, facial piercings and other distinguishing features, something we couldn't work out why till we saw them in action, dressed in black and blending into the general population, so they obviously didn't want people that would stand out.
Also, they were offering a decent rate of pay, but in order to achieve that rate, you had to pay for some enhanced security check, you had to pay towards your uniform, and you had to pay towards your training, plus various other things that rang plenty of alarm bells.
We have seen them in action in town, and they are like stalkers, hiding in the shadows then following the soft targets in order to issue. One of my colleagues had seen them watching a guy that was smoking and he (the colleague) as he passed the target, mentioned that he was being watched to and make sure his fag butt went in a bin. The enforcement officer caught up with my colleague and read him the riot act about preventing them from conducting their duties by warning the guy and that they wouldn't warn anyone they saw parked wrong so 'courtesy' should work both ways, my colleague actually said to them, if you want to warn someone they are parked wrong and likely to get a ticket then crack on!
It's nice in one way that there are people in town more hated than us now, at least we are visible and we give people the chance to move before we book em, they just skulk about and pounce.
They are 'reporting' to the Borough Council and not the County Council, oh and forgot to mention, when they started apparently they had 9 officers, by the start of week 2, they were down to 3!
We were also hoping to see them patrolling the area near the football ground during a home match, to see if they would book the guys outside the pubs, the ones getting drunk and rowdy and throwing their fag ends on the pavement, nah, they were in town targetting the shoppers.
Also, they were offering a decent rate of pay, but in order to achieve that rate, you had to pay for some enhanced security check, you had to pay towards your uniform, and you had to pay towards your training, plus various other things that rang plenty of alarm bells.
We have seen them in action in town, and they are like stalkers, hiding in the shadows then following the soft targets in order to issue. One of my colleagues had seen them watching a guy that was smoking and he (the colleague) as he passed the target, mentioned that he was being watched to and make sure his fag butt went in a bin. The enforcement officer caught up with my colleague and read him the riot act about preventing them from conducting their duties by warning the guy and that they wouldn't warn anyone they saw parked wrong so 'courtesy' should work both ways, my colleague actually said to them, if you want to warn someone they are parked wrong and likely to get a ticket then crack on!
It's nice in one way that there are people in town more hated than us now, at least we are visible and we give people the chance to move before we book em, they just skulk about and pounce.
They are 'reporting' to the Borough Council and not the County Council, oh and forgot to mention, when they started apparently they had 9 officers, by the start of week 2, they were down to 3!
We were also hoping to see them patrolling the area near the football ground during a home match, to see if they would book the guys outside the pubs, the ones getting drunk and rowdy and throwing their fag ends on the pavement, nah, they were in town targetting the shoppers.
Edited by speedchick on Wednesday 17th May 18:46
Boosted LS1 said:
I've just read in a newspaper that Kingdom were paying their wardens £5 per ticket issued after 4 tickets had been issued first. The council aren't very pleased. Well well, what a surprise.
It was £5 after 4 tickets, then £6 after 5 tickets and £7 after 6 etc etc.There was a guy on the program boasting of recieving over £1000 in a month bonus from the extra tickets
Short Grain said:
Boosted LS1 said:
They're civilians like you or I so have no powers to detain for a littering offence imo. All they can do is follow you and hope a PC arrives. I don't think PCSO's can detain you either.
I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
I thought Court Bailiffs were authorised / licenced by the High Court and had powers of entry and also seizure with the law behind them. .I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
Debt Collection agents are private companies and are the ones with the dodgy tactics. The only TV programme I've seen with actual Bailiffs is The Sheriffs Are Coming. So the ones in 'can't pay' are just collection agents. Stand to be corrected though.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The problem is, that I can't go a week on my regular commute without somebody (often the same person) without any rail/tube ticket claiming to have just lost it and then claiming to have no id, money or cards on them. To a person they always seem to fall back on an abusive and loud defence in an attempt to make the conductor uncomfortable.
Short Grain said:
Boosted LS1 said:
They're civilians like you or I so have no powers to detain for a littering offence imo. All they can do is follow you and hope a PC arrives. I don't think PCSO's can detain you either.
I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
I thought Court Bailiffs were authorised / licenced by the High Court and had powers of entry and also seizure with the law behind them. .I've also noticed the bailiffs in 'Can't pay, we'll take it away' pulling a few strokes. They're from a private debt collection agency and nothing to do officially with the High Court apart from the fact they pick up jobs from there.
All in all these sorts are trying to look more official and threatening.
Debt Collection agents are private companies and are the ones with the dodgy tactics. The only TV programme I've seen with actual Bailiffs is The Sheriffs Are Coming. So the ones in 'can't pay' are just collection agents. Stand to be corrected though.
k about with Sheriffs.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff