Issued COVID FPN by a police officer

[Graveworm]

Stigproducts said:

If members of the public are expected to read and understand the full legislation documents then its not really going to work

OP- I wouldn't worry too much. It looks like if you contest it, your chances of winning are about 100%

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/every-single-coronavirus...

“One hundred per cent of prosecutions under the Coronavirus Act to date have been wrong."

This isn't under the coronavirus act. Nearly anything prosecuted under that was for the wrong offence. To be fair many who are prosecuted initially for the coronavirus act are substituted with Regulations offences instead. They can't be dealt with by FPN.
FPNs are issued under the regs. Still pretty appalling, after all this time they are withdrawing 17 percent of those. As it is reported by the OP this shouldn't have been issued.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/januarys-coronavir...

[croyde]

I'm in London. The local parks are like festivals, even in the week, hence I drive 30 miles out to the country and do an 8 mile hike hardly seeing anyone.

Surely that's being sensible.

[aka_kerrly]

Ilovejapcrap said:

aka_kerrly said:

Gooly said:

A police officer issued a COVID FPN to me 11 days ago whilst I was on a walk with someone not from my household 3 miles from my house.


What burden of proof or evidence would I require? Should I enlist a witness?

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 24th February 19:03

Lockdown rules said you cannot mix with people not from your household.
The evidence , you 3 miles from your house with someone NOT from your house

Pretty dam simple isn't it.

Unless you live alone and they are your bubble

Exactly, if he explained that to the officer then he wouldn't have got a ticket so the likelihood is he doesn't live alone and the person he was with is not a support bubble hence he got a fine.

[Oceanrower]

aka_kerrly said:

Ilovejapcrap said:

aka_kerrly said:

Gooly said:

A police officer issued a COVID FPN to me 11 days ago whilst I was on a walk with someone not from my household 3 miles from my house.


What burden of proof or evidence would I require? Should I enlist a witness?

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 24th February 19:03

Lockdown rules said you cannot mix with people not from your household.
The evidence , you 3 miles from your house with someone NOT from your house

Pretty dam simple isn't it.

Unless you live alone and they are your bubble

Exactly, if he explained that to the officer then he wouldn't have got a ticket so the likelihood is he doesn't live alone and the person he was with is not a support bubble hence he got a fine.

Christ, here we go again. The guidance is not the rules.

You may exercise with one other person.

Stop talking bks...

[Gooly]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

Taita said:

Was the FPN for being 3 miles away (seems reasonable to do a 3 mile walk for exercise to me.....) or for the person not from your household?

Best of luck to you

The FPN was for being with someone not from my household and allegedly not taking exercise with them, as the officers saw me take a pic of my car when they drove past. We had just returned back from a long walk and I was about to drive home. The officer said to me, charmingly, that she had earlier given a ticket to a lady who had not left her house for 6 weeks, and had travelled to Trafalger Square to walk around and take photos. To me, the act of taking photos does not diminish the fact that one is taking exercise in a public outdoor environment by walking before or after said photos were taken. As an aside, I did raise this to her, and her reply to me was simply that the lady in question could appeal if she wanted to. I reminded her that to most people, appealing the decision of a police officer in a magistrates court is likely quite daunting, but she appeared to not give a toss.

I am happy to argue this part in court - whether or not I win will depend on how limiting the concept of 'exercise' is as defined in the legislation. I do not care to discuss this here as I am set on appealing regardless and I'm sure many will disagree with my interpretation, however I would like to know where I stand in terms of potential liability if the magistrates disagrees with me and whether or not I should chase up the FPN if it is to not arrive. I live in a maisonette that often has issues with mail delivery and have had to order duplicate V5s on the last three cars I bought while living here due to mail issues.

Durzel said:

You were stopped at the time, in person, so like a driving offence where you get pulled there is no necessity to follow it up with a NIP.

You already know you’re being prosecuted because you were told you were, and they know who you are so don’t need to ask “who was walking at this location” (to use the driving metaphor)

Thanks for this. As I suspected - do you know if there is any sort of timeframe at all by which the FPN needs to be served? As far as I am aware, once served, a 28 day clock starts ticking and it is after that point that the court process can start.

Smiljan said:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay...

This is guidance, not legislation - please don't stop doing your walks. If they benefit you and your wellbeing then continue doing them, as they are completely legal. There are no distance or time regulations with regards to exercise or any other travel listed under the exemptions.

Bigends said:

Its not recordable or notifiable

Very good to know - thank you

croyde said:

I'm in London. The local parks are like festivals, even in the week, hence I drive 30 miles out to the country and do an 8 mile hike hardly seeing anyone.

Surely that's being sensible.

To me it absolutely and wholly is. I live in SW and the local commons and high streets resemble Glastonbury on any dry day, evening or night if the weather is above 5degrees. The officer suggested that next time I should stay in my local area, the irony being that having walked around an almost deserted central london for 4 hours, the most interpersonal contact I had was from the 6 police officers barrelling out of the van and surrounding us. Had I stayed in my 'local area' I would have certainly been more at risk.

aka_kerrly said:

Ilovejapcrap said:

aka_kerrly said:

Gooly said:

A police officer issued a COVID FPN to me 11 days ago whilst I was on a walk with someone not from my household 3 miles from my house.


What burden of proof or evidence would I require? Should I enlist a witness?

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 24th February 19:03

Lockdown rules said you cannot mix with people not from your household.
The evidence , you 3 miles from your house with someone NOT from your house

Pretty dam simple isn't it.

Unless you live alone and they are your bubble

Exactly, if he explained that to the officer then he wouldn't have got a ticket so the likelihood is he doesn't live alone and the person he was with is not a support bubble hence he got a fine.

Not simple enough clearly. There are several exemptions for meeting someone outside of your household, one of which being to take exercise outdoors with someone. This is clearly written in the legislation. Sincerely hope you don't go into law enforcement or other legal-related professions.

[aka_kerrly]

Oceanrower said:

aka_kerrly said:

Ilovejapcrap said:

aka_kerrly said:

Gooly said:

A police officer issued a COVID FPN to me 11 days ago whilst I was on a walk with someone not from my household 3 miles from my house.


What burden of proof or evidence would I require? Should I enlist a witness?

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 24th February 19:03

Lockdown rules said you cannot mix with people not from your household.
The evidence , you 3 miles from your house with someone NOT from your house

Pretty dam simple isn't it.

Unless you live alone and they are your bubble

Exactly, if he explained that to the officer then he wouldn't have got a ticket so the likelihood is he doesn't live alone and the person he was with is not a support bubble hence he got a fine.

Christ, here we go again. The guidance is not the rules.

You may exercise with one other person.

Stop talking bks...

FFS I'm approaching this from the point of view of the officer issuing the fine . If the police have been told to go out an enforce guidance/rules then it's highly likely that they asked the OP a few questions an the answers he gave fit within their GUIDEANCE OR LAW OR RULES to issue the ticket.

[The_Nugget]

From the OPs update it seems the issue here is not whether or not you are legally allowed to exercise with someone from another household (you are). Or even if you need to do that locally (you don’t, necessarily).

The issue is that the officer appears to not believe that the OP (at the time of the offence) was exercising with their ‘buddy.’

The OP hasn’t provided specifics but imagine this scenario:
Buddies arrive independently to meet for a walk.
Buddies have walk and arrive back at vehicles.
All legal.
Buddies spend half an hour in the car park discussing cars, taking photos of cars, etc - the half an hour is possibly illegal.

Office issues FPN - possibly correctly.

Ultimately OP, without exact details, which you said you won’t give, any opinion offered here is speculation.

[The_Nugget]

Stigproducts said:

If members of the public are expected to read and understand the full legislation documents then its not really going to work

OP- I wouldn't worry too much. It looks like if you contest it, your chances of winning are about 100%

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/every-single-coronavirus...

“One hundred per cent of prosecutions under the Coronavirus Act to date have been wrong."

I’d agree in principle that most people don’t need to read and understand detailed legislation. However in this case, the legislation is pretty simple to understand. The guidance to the legislation is supposed to make it even more understandable.
What is actually occurring is that it mis-represents the legislation and garnishes it with things that the Government clearly want you to do but aren’t included.

The police, on some occasions, seem to believe the guidance is law.
So in this case, reading the (pretty simple) legislation is good advice, rather than quoting from the guidance as ‘fact’.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Bigends said:

The officers statement, their bodyworn camera footage and a statement of facts will be examined by a process unit - they will decide whether or not to issue the FPN.

I'd certainly decline payment - I was at least three miles from home on a bike ride for exercise yesterday and wouldnt be to chuffed had I been stopped and potentially copping a ticket whilst out and about for a perfectly valid reason

Make sure their body worn is on and ask them to explain the legislation..

When challenged a minister said recently 'we expect members of the public to use common sense'.

That's not legislation then..

[Roger Irrelevant]

aka_kerrly said:

Oceanrower said:

aka_kerrly said:

Ilovejapcrap said:

aka_kerrly said:

Gooly said:

A police officer issued a COVID FPN to me 11 days ago whilst I was on a walk with someone not from my household 3 miles from my house.


What burden of proof or evidence would I require? Should I enlist a witness?

Edited by Gooly on Wednesday 24th February 19:03

Lockdown rules said you cannot mix with people not from your household.
The evidence , you 3 miles from your house with someone NOT from your house

Pretty dam simple isn't it.

Unless you live alone and they are your bubble

Exactly, if he explained that to the officer then he wouldn't have got a ticket so the likelihood is he doesn't live alone and the person he was with is not a support bubble hence he got a fine.

Christ, here we go again. The guidance is not the rules.

You may exercise with one other person.

Stop talking bks...

FFS I'm approaching this from the point of view of the officer issuing the fine . If the police have been told to go out an enforce guidance/rules then it's highly likely that they asked the OP a few questions an the answers he gave fit within their GUIDEANCE OR LAW OR RULES to issue the ticket.

Not sure what point you're making here. What the OP did is within the law. What the OP did is also within the guidance. Are you saying that we should all regulate our behaviour not only by reference to the law (which is mandatory), not only by reference to guidance (which is not mandatory but will in most cases be sensible), but also by reference to what an ill-informed bobby might mistakenly think the law is? I presume you're not because that would be silly - like limiting yourself to 60 on the motorway just in case there's a policeman about who thinks that's the law - so what are you saying?

[croyde]

If the officer was so proud of ticketing a women who hadn't left the house in 6 weeks, it sounds like she's a bully and a .

OP, I take it you were in that Ghost Town formerly called central London.

I'm about 8 miles from central, I quite fancied a hike around there but it seems it's not a good idea.

I'll keep going to where the police don't like getting their shiny boots all muddy.

[AngryPartsBloke]

Stigproducts said:

If members of the public are expected to read and understand the full legislation documents then its not really going to work

"

Why? they aren't complicated, the meaning of words is a matter of fact.

To my knowledge, there has been very little issue with members of the public understanding the law. There has been a subset of people who know full well that their actions are against the law and a lot of Police forces who misunderstand that their role is to enforce the law as it is written and not guidance/the whim of the government.

[Smiljan]

Oceanrower said:

Christ, here we go again. The guidance is not the rules.

You may exercise with one other person.

Stop talking bks...

Both the guidance and the law says you can exercise with one other person not from your household. No different.

The OP was doing what’s within both and still got a ticket, However, the PC issuing the ticket said it was because they had met up and were not exercising at all just chatting together by their cars.

Personally I see the guidance as what’s best for me minimise the chances of catching the virus and / or spreading it around. The law is what can be enforced and should not be any difference as people clearly can’t follow simple guidance on their own. I’d rather it was this way than some other countries approach which also haven’t stopped outbreaks.

In this case the OP by his own description of events has done absolutely nothing wrong that merits the FPN.

When issued with one of these FPNs what kind of on the spot notice do you get? Do they fill out a form? Give you reference number? Text?

The OP is concerned the FPN may not get posted and doesn’t know if it’s been issued for sure or not, is there nothing you get on the spot?

Good luck with your case OP I’ll keep an eye on the thread and see how you get on.

[Durzel]

I guess it speaks to the wider question of what is exercise?

For some super active people going for a walk isn't exercise, they need to be doing mini marathons. For clinically obese people just getting some fresh air and moving around a bit might be considered exercise, relative to their current mobility.

Who is anyone to define exactly what exercise is, when everyone is different? Can it be objectively defined? Dictionary.com defines it simply as "physical exertion". Just moving your limbs requires physical exertion.

When does "exercise" begin and end? if I'm out for a brisk walk and I briefly stop to take a photo, have I stopped "exercising"? I'd suggest not. Maybe I might do some deep breathing exercises while I'm taking photos, as is my want.

Common sense needs to prevail with this stuff, and on the face of it I would echo the comments above about the cop apparently gleefully pointing out that she ticketed someone who hadn't left the house for 6 weeks, like it was a merit badge or something.

[Lonely]

Durzel said:

I guess it speaks to the wider question of what is exercise?

For some super active people going for a walk isn't exercise, they need to be doing mini marathons. For clinically obese people just getting some fresh air and moving around a bit might be considered exercise, relative to their current mobility.

Who is anyone to define exactly what exercise is, when everyone is different? Can it be objectively defined? Dictionary.com defines it simply as "physical exertion". Just moving your limbs requires physical exertion.

When does "exercise" begin and end? if I'm out for a brisk walk and I briefly stop to take a photo, have I stopped "exercising"? I'd suggest not. Maybe I might do some deep breathing exercises while I'm taking photos, as is my want.

Common sense needs to prevail with this stuff, and on the face of it I would echo the comments above about the cop apparently gleefully pointing out that she ticketed someone who hadn't left the house for 6 weeks, like it was a merit badge or something.

I don't think you even need to think too deeply about it as walking is actually mentioned in the government guidance in the exercise section.

FWIW I also think OP should make an official complaint about the officers attitude. She sounds like a right plank.

[Brave Fart]

I have nothing very much to add to what's been said, apart from this: the inability of some police officers to apply the law (not guidance, not the "spirit of lockdown") nearly one year from the initial lockdown is one of two things. Either those officers are thick/spiteful/power crazed, or it's a deliberate policy by senior officers to intimidate the public. Perhaps both.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

There's so much legislation to know and it changes. You can't know everything and understand the points to prove. It's a nightmare. Just when a response officer 'knows' his/her legislation they move on/upwards or into a specialist role.

Think about it- would you know everything from traffic, offences against the man, drugs offences, various other PACE, common law AND Covid?

The officer isn't thick. Would you know it? Yes it's best to know covid legislation but when you might come across it once in a month and you have case files, everything else to manage wheres the time?

[Pit Pony]

Lonely said:

Durzel said:

I guess it speaks to the wider question of what is exercise?

For some super active people going for a walk isn't exercise, they need to be doing mini marathons. For clinically obese people just getting some fresh air and moving around a bit might be considered exercise, relative to their current mobility.

Who is anyone to define exactly what exercise is, when everyone is different? Can it be objectively defined? Dictionary.com defines it simply as "physical exertion". Just moving your limbs requires physical exertion.

When does "exercise" begin and end? if I'm out for a brisk walk and I briefly stop to take a photo, have I stopped "exercising"? I'd suggest not. Maybe I might do some deep breathing exercises while I'm taking photos, as is my want.

Common sense needs to prevail with this stuff, and on the face of it I would echo the comments above about the cop apparently gleefully pointing out that she ticketed someone who hadn't left the house for 6 weeks, like it was a merit badge or something.

I don't think you even need to think too deeply about it as walking is actually mentioned in the government guidance in the exercise section.

FWIW I also think OP should make an official complaint about the officers attitude. She sounds like a right plank.

My wife has a pain in her foot. She's desperate to see the sea. If I drive 1 mile, she will have too far to walk through woods and sand dunes to get to the sea. If I drive 5 miles, I can park 20 yards from a sea wall with 100 iron statues on the beach, and she can get out and hobble to see the sea. It's barely exercise but is it local enough?

[mat205125]

Taita said:

Was the FPN for being 3 miles away (seems reasonable to do a 3 mile walk for exercise to me.....) or for the person not from your household?

Best of luck to you

A six mile walk if you're planning to get home

[Bigends]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

There's so much legislation to know and it changes. You can't know everything and understand the points to prove. It's a nightmare. Just when a response officer 'knows' his/her legislation they move on/upwards or into a specialist role.

Think about it- would you know everything from traffic, offences against the man, drugs offences, various other PACE, common law AND Covid?

The officer isn't thick. Would you know it? Yes it's best to know covid legislation but when you might come across it once in a month and you have case files, everything else to manage wheres the time?

This is a High profile offence which has been in place for some time now. Officers dont need to know / memorise the whole act - but should be up to speed on the parts theyre most likely to come across by now.
Unless they were sent to the OP's as a result of a call - then the officer initiated the contact here and should be familiar with the legislation before accusing him of committing the offence

Edited by Bigends on Thursday 25th February 12:46