Police officer dismissed for favouring clampers
Discussion
There have been many reports of the police dismissing clamping disputes as a "civil matter", but when an officer does turn out to the scene they turn out to be a rotten apple in league with the clampers.
Streaky
PS - The idea of a 'plastic' calling the 'cardboard' amused me - S
East Lancashire Post said:
Yvette Ashton ["the Carboard Cop"] – who hit the headlines when life-sized pictures were dotted around Preston city centre to deter criminals – has been dismissed for gross misconduct.
A disciplinary hearing was told a member of the public conacted the police after her vehicle was clamped in Preston city centre.
The driver claimed there was no warning signs when she parked on the private land and alleged a witness had seen clampers fix a notice to a wall before clamping her vehicle.
A passing PCSO telephoned Ms Ashton, who arrived at the scene with the clampers and dismissed the motorist’s claims.
The woman lodged a formal complaint with Lancashire Police, claiming the then police constable had failed to investigate her complaints adequately.
Police investigators then discovered Ms Ashton, who lives in Walmer Bridge, had a private arrangement with the clampers to allow her to park her own car on private land while she was at work.
The 46-year-old was subsequently dismissed following a hearing at Lancashire Constabulary’s headquarters, which questioned her “honesty and integrity”.
The hearing also investigated complaints that Ms Ashton had twice reported to work in plain clothes.
Today Ms Ashton, who was a police officer for 14 years, vowed to appeal the decision describing the incident as “a mistake”.
The mother-of-three claimed she struck the parking deal to help her get to work on time as she has a severely disabled son, Oliver, who needs special care.
Her husband, Kevin Browne, 44, said: “While working in the city centre, Yvette became friends with the manager of a local vehicle clamping company.
“Yvette told this manager about Oliver’s disability and the problems she has parking near the new police station.
“He said he would speak to the manager at a local organisation which has land available for local business people to park on using a permit, to see if he could help.
“The manager of the organisation agreed for Yvette to have use of a permit to park, but only if there was sufficient room.”
However, Mr Browne admitted his wife had not invesigated the woman’s complaints properly.
He said: “This woman (the motorist) saw a police community support officer and told him about the situation. The PCSO rang Yvette who was on duty and sensing panic in his voice, Yvette assumed a clamp was being cut off so she called the manager of the clamping company and asked him to make his way to the scene.
“He asked her where she was and as she was not far away, he offered her a life, which she accepted.
“When Yvette got there, the clamping manager stayed in the van and let her deal with the dispute.
“The clampers assured Yvette they were not allowed to carry signs in the van and that a sign erector was always called to put signs up.
“Yvette knew from her friendship with the clamping manager that this was the way things were supposed to happen.
“She made a decision not to look in the clampers van to check there were no signs or fitting equipment as she didn’t think she needed to.
“But by not dealing with this dispute properly, the police professional standards decided Yvette’s integrity was in serious question as she had been given a permit by this clamping company and they felt she was biased towards the clamping company.”
Ms Ashton today said: “At this stage, I do not want to comment on the outcome of the hearing because I am going to appeal.
“I want to clear my name and get my job back as I did not deserve to be dismissed for a mistake.”
A spokesman from Lancashire Police said: “Ms Ashton was dismissed by the Constabulary at a misconduct hearing on September 1.
“She was found to have breached the standards of professional behaviour expected by a police officer following a complaint received from a member of the public.”
Proper action taken by her force, and obviously a one-off.A disciplinary hearing was told a member of the public conacted the police after her vehicle was clamped in Preston city centre.
The driver claimed there was no warning signs when she parked on the private land and alleged a witness had seen clampers fix a notice to a wall before clamping her vehicle.
A passing PCSO telephoned Ms Ashton, who arrived at the scene with the clampers and dismissed the motorist’s claims.
The woman lodged a formal complaint with Lancashire Police, claiming the then police constable had failed to investigate her complaints adequately.
Police investigators then discovered Ms Ashton, who lives in Walmer Bridge, had a private arrangement with the clampers to allow her to park her own car on private land while she was at work.
The 46-year-old was subsequently dismissed following a hearing at Lancashire Constabulary’s headquarters, which questioned her “honesty and integrity”.
The hearing also investigated complaints that Ms Ashton had twice reported to work in plain clothes.
Today Ms Ashton, who was a police officer for 14 years, vowed to appeal the decision describing the incident as “a mistake”.
The mother-of-three claimed she struck the parking deal to help her get to work on time as she has a severely disabled son, Oliver, who needs special care.
Her husband, Kevin Browne, 44, said: “While working in the city centre, Yvette became friends with the manager of a local vehicle clamping company.
“Yvette told this manager about Oliver’s disability and the problems she has parking near the new police station.
“He said he would speak to the manager at a local organisation which has land available for local business people to park on using a permit, to see if he could help.
“The manager of the organisation agreed for Yvette to have use of a permit to park, but only if there was sufficient room.”
However, Mr Browne admitted his wife had not invesigated the woman’s complaints properly.
He said: “This woman (the motorist) saw a police community support officer and told him about the situation. The PCSO rang Yvette who was on duty and sensing panic in his voice, Yvette assumed a clamp was being cut off so she called the manager of the clamping company and asked him to make his way to the scene.
“He asked her where she was and as she was not far away, he offered her a life, which she accepted.
“When Yvette got there, the clamping manager stayed in the van and let her deal with the dispute.
“The clampers assured Yvette they were not allowed to carry signs in the van and that a sign erector was always called to put signs up.
“Yvette knew from her friendship with the clamping manager that this was the way things were supposed to happen.
“She made a decision not to look in the clampers van to check there were no signs or fitting equipment as she didn’t think she needed to.
“But by not dealing with this dispute properly, the police professional standards decided Yvette’s integrity was in serious question as she had been given a permit by this clamping company and they felt she was biased towards the clamping company.”
Ms Ashton today said: “At this stage, I do not want to comment on the outcome of the hearing because I am going to appeal.
“I want to clear my name and get my job back as I did not deserve to be dismissed for a mistake.”
A spokesman from Lancashire Police said: “Ms Ashton was dismissed by the Constabulary at a misconduct hearing on September 1.
“She was found to have breached the standards of professional behaviour expected by a police officer following a complaint received from a member of the public.”
Streaky
PS - The idea of a 'plastic' calling the 'cardboard' amused me - S
I'm inclined to think she was a bit daft rather than bent. Allowing herself to be put in a position where she would be victim to either a dishonest motorist or a dishonest clamper 'friend' was pretty naive.
The fact that she was dumb enough to turn up to an dispute between a clamper and a motorist in the clamper's van reinforces that.
The fact that she was dumb enough to turn up to an dispute between a clamper and a motorist in the clamper's van reinforces that.
Harking back to when I was in training school, it was drummed into us from the word 'go' that under no circumstances were you allowed to put yourself in a position where you 'owed someone a favour'. To do so would spell the end of your Police career.
Perhaps this particular officer was absent when that particular S/O was taught?
Perhaps this particular officer was absent when that particular S/O was taught?
East Lancashire Post said:
The mother-of-three claimed she struck the parking deal to help her get to work on time as she has a severely disabled son, Oliver, who needs special care.
“Yvette told this manager about Oliver’s disability and the problems she has parking near the new police station.
What has her son being disabled got to do with her parking at work?“Yvette told this manager about Oliver’s disability and the problems she has parking near the new police station.
Or is it just another sob story to make it look like she is hard done to?
maser_spyder said:
Another one of those holier-than-thou types who when toppling over a rocky precipice, will continue to bellow their grievances to the void on the way down.
Sounds like a result to me, clear conflict of interest. Well done to the MoP for standing up for themselves.
I'm more inclined to say well done to the police for actually being sensible with discipline rather than just saying never mind.Sounds like a result to me, clear conflict of interest. Well done to the MoP for standing up for themselves.
- STheEnd said:
I think she was having an affair with the clamping boss...
That was my "reading between the lines" of it too. Possibly also taking a bung out of the clamper's coffers too? So long as it was just a few quid and in cash, which such companies can have ready access too, there is no way they'd ever be able to trace that.Sounds like a good result all round.
poo at Paul's said:
TheEnd said:
I think she was having an affair with the clamping boss...
That was my "reading between the lines" of it too. Possibly also taking a bung out of the clamper's coffers too? So long as it was just a few quid and in cash, which such companies can have ready access too, there is no way they'd ever be able to trace that.Sounds like a good result all round.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff