Jump to content

Featured Posts

17 minutes ago, Old Son said:

We seem to have forgotten about the idiot party goers!!

Isn't that who most of these 196 people are? Surely there can't have been as many as 196 illegal party organisers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, matty40s said:

196 is the event organisers, attendees now can enjoy a £800 fine if over 15 people at an event, up from £200 until recently.

It's hard to believe that so many people can be so unconcerned about the law and about people's welfare.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Philip Hooton said:

I suspect in this instance boat confiscation was the only option for a repeat offender, fines are irrelevant as they will rarely be paid and the sanctions against non payment are pretty much non existent.

 in all a pointless exercise for the authorities.

 

"But snapshot figures from early January, show that only five of the 196 £10,000 fines handed out in England have been paid. While 53 are being formally contested, 42 have been ignored and 96 still had time left to pay in the 28-day payment period.

The data from criminal records office Acro, that administers the fines, were given to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC)".

I seem to remember someone telling me that if you get a £10K fine for covid stuff, then you can contest it, it goes to court and then the penalty is assessed by the judge and is set at what the offender can afford - ie his income. If low, then the fine will be £100's rather than £10K. Not a clue if this is correct but sounds typical of the way the law is applied in this country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

I wonder who has confiscated his boat and which act allows them to do that.

 

I assume from the report that it is the police. I'm sure I've seen CRT byelaws or somesuch that say a person must not conduct illegal activities on a boat (but I don't recall where), but the process has been far too rapid for it to be CRT doing the confiscating.

 

Tam

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

But there is no law in this country that allows you just to take someone's property without proper authorisation. I am just wondering what it was. I supposed it could be seized as part of an ongoing investigation, like when they take a car away.

 

I'm not sorry if he is lost it but we should all be worried about the legalities. You break some law so they just decide to take your home away or property. 

I imagine the police would have used the same legislation that allows them to seize the equipment used at illegal raves and other noisy gatherings. Even though one can argue with Crt it is a home i doubt the police would have to take this into account initially. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

As I said I have no sympathy for him, I am just concerned that someone can confiscate your property before you are found guilt of an offence. Its a dangerous step IMO.

And rightly so, unfortunately it is this type of idiot that encourages the law to become emboldened and make life progressively harder for everyone else. 

  Bad application of the law has cost the public a fortune in recent years and was supercharged by possibly the most incompetent home Secretary in living memory, Theresa May, with umpteen illegal deportations and the like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

As I said I have no sympathy for him, I am just concerned that someone can confiscate your property before you are found guilt of an offence. Its a dangerous step IMO.

I think that confiscation on the perceived risk of or even known future planned event may well make this more acceptable.

1 hour ago, Tam & Di said:

 

I assume from the report that it is the police. I'm sure I've seen CRT byelaws or somesuch that say a person must not conduct illegal activities on a boat (but I don't recall where), but the process has been far too rapid for it to be CRT doing the confiscating.

 

Tam

CRT have only just got around to sending the Chaplains round after the first event...

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Athy said:

That said, the average bod probably hasn't got £10,000 handy.

 

Isn't that the deterrent value (for most people)?

 

46 minutes ago, BWM said:

Bad application of the law has cost the public a fortune in recent years and was supercharged by possibly the most incompetent home Secretary in living memory, Theresa May, with umpteen illegal deportations and the like.

 

You have forgotten one Priti Patel priti quickly!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, matty40s said:

I think that confiscation on the perceived risk of or even known future planned event may well make this more acceptable.

 

So if you are suspect of fly tipping on 2 occasions its ok to confiscate your truck in case you do it again. I dont like that sort of law. Remember he has been caught but not convicted of anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, buccaneer66 said:

Presumably then you also don't like the police confiscating cars from uninsured drivers?

No, that is the law. The police stop you and if you can't prove the car is insured it it is take from you until you can show the evidence that it was insure

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

So if you are suspect of fly tipping on 2 occasions its ok to confiscate your truck in case you do it again. I dont like that sort of law. Remember he has been caught but not convicted of anything.

Neither have criminals when they police take their guns off them or the motorist who has a car confiscated at the road side because of no tax or insurance..

Edited by Jerra
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like all things it comes down to the 'cost of doing business' If the fines are less than the profit being made they will continue.  I had a collegue at work who worked in London and never paid to park,  The fines added up to less than the parking charges, more wardens issuing tickets more frequently would have changed the odds and he would have paid to park. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

If somebody is caught actively in the act of fly tipping I would wholeheartedly support their vehicle being confiscated and crushed.

 

 

 

Yes but.....

As we have seen some police forces have rather gone over the top with applying covid laws, and before that using anti-terrorism laws to break up non violent demonstrations.

They do tend to do this.

I would not be happy if a  passenger in my car threw an apple core out of the car window, or if a bit of paper fell out of my pocket as I got out of the car, and the police took my car away for fly-tipping.

 

My own view is that the police have a very hard job with the law tending to favour criminals and because of this they have bad days and loose the plot a bit, but the law should not encourage this.

 

..............Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dmr said:

 

Yes but.....

As we have seen some police forces have rather gone over the top with applying covid laws, and before that using anti-terrorism laws to break up non violent demonstrations.

They do tend to do this.

I would not be happy if a  passenger in my car threw an apple core out of the car window, or if a bit of paper fell out of my pocket as I got out of the car, and the police took my car away for fly-tipping.

 

My own view is that the police have a very hard job with the law tending to favour criminals and because of this they have bad days and loose the plot a bit, but the law should not encourage this.

 

..............Dave

 

I wasnt talking about minor littering., I was talking about the goons that dump whole kitchens, house clearences etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Isn't that the deterrent value (for most people)?

 

 

You have forgotten one Priti Patel priti quickly!

That one is still a work in progress, but i  can see her being memorable for all the wrong reasons!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

I wasnt talking about minor littering., I was talking about the goons that dump whole kitchens, house clearences etc.

I agree about goons.   There is a lay-by just outside town amere 2 miles from the recycling centre where if it isn't recyclable there is acceptance for dumping.   Yet there are frequently double bed mattresses, TVs etc dumped.  If they can manage to transport it to the lay-by why the %^&* can't they just go the further 2 miles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jerra said:

I agree about goons.   There is a lay-by just outside town amere 2 miles from the recycling centre where if it isn't recyclable there is acceptance for dumping.   Yet there are frequently double bed mattresses, TVs etc dumped.  If they can manage to transport it to the lay-by why the %^&* can't they just go the further 2 miles.

 

We have the same. I once found a pile somebody had dumped where I walk the dog. Amongst it was a load of addressed correspondence pin pointing it to the local market town, which is also where the local recycling centre is.

 

They had actually had to drive past that to get to where they dumped it.

 

I took photos of the address and past the info. onto the council to deal with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

I wasnt talking about minor littering., I was talking about the goons that dump whole kitchens, house clearences etc.

But now you are picking on who to penalise. is it a bed, a bed and a chair or just a bedside table?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

But now you are picking on who to penalise. is it a bed, a bed and a chair or just a bedside table?

 

I would expect it would be possible to come up with a sensible set of guidelines for the police/local authorities to go by with nationally agreed enforcement around quantities, material types, hazard etc.

 

As in not something so loose that it gets abused, like the covid rules appear to have been.

 

But as you have disagreed with the harder approach, how would you approach the problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

I would expect it would be possible to come up with a sensible set of guidelines for the police/local authorities to go by with nationally agreed enforcement around quantities, material types, hazard etc.

 

As in not something so loose that it gets abused, like the covid rules appear to have been.

 

But as you have disagreed with the harder approach, how would you approach the problem?

Far from it, but I am anti vigilantly. That is why I asked right at the beginning about under what authority they confiscated his boat. If the law say they can do it fine. A classic example of where this would be appropriate is with the Rita Ora's birthday where the fine was just part of the party expense.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.