Purpose

To consider and approve Fixed Penalty Fine
levels for Environmental Crime Offences

Content

RESOLVED
 
KEY DECISION
 

That
the Executive,
 

a)     
Adopted Option Two as set out in Section 5 of the
report as the new levels for fixed penalty notice (FPN) for
offences related to littering, graffiti, fly-tipping, and household
waste duty of care and to give a discount of 25% i.e., discounted
fine value, for early payment as set out in paragraph 5.6 of this
report.

 

b)     
Amended the payment period for FPNs for littering,
graffiti, fly-tipping, and household waste duty of care to 28 days
and the early payment (discounted FPN level) period to 14
days.

 

c)     
Delegated responsibility to the Executive Director
of Place and Economy in consultation with the Executive Member for
Highways, Travel and Assets for the amendment of the
Council’s Enforcement Policies and the Council’s Fees
and Charges publication in respect of the changes to the early
repayment discount and the new fine amounts.

 
 

Reason
for Recommendations – To accord with the Regulations and the
Council’s Enforcement Policy. This recommendation supports
the Corporate Plan Key Commitments specifically
 

·      
Green, sustainable environment

·      
Safe and thriving places

 

Alternative Options Considered –
 

·      
Do Nothing Option – this option was
considered, however given the increasing cost to the Council for
the activities relating to the investigation, and clearances of
incidents, and the resources required to complete meaningful
enforcement action, this option ultimately will reduce the
resources the Council can allocate to environmental enforcement.
Code of practice for litter and refuse 11D.3 is clear that
enforcement should be self-financing, and neither national nor
local taxpayers should be expected to meet any deficit. This also
misses the opportunity to send a clear message to offenders that
the Council will take proportionate enforcement action against
environmental offences.
 

·      
Increase fines to a lesser amount – this
option was considered however the risks identified for increasing
are similar regardless of the fine amount. A smaller increase in
the fine does less to reduce the current gap between expenditure
and cost recovery for the Council in respect of waste enforcement
and the removal of fly tipping within the local authority area.
This also misses the opportunity to send a clear message to
offenders that the Council will take proportionate enforcement
action against environmental offences.
 

·      
Remove the option for an early repayment discount.
-

o  
this option was considered as part of the key
messages to demonstrate the robust approach taken by North
Northamptonshire Council in respect of incidents of environmental
crime. 

o  
To remove the early repayment discount is contrary
to the Code of Practice that requires enforcing authorities to set
fixed penalties, within the ranges specified in the Environmental
Offences (Fixed Penalties) (England) Regulations 2017 and that they
should select an appropriate level to reflect local circumstances,
including local ability to pay.

o  
The Council’s Enforcement Policies and
guidance within the Council’s Enforcement Concordat are the
Council’s current best practice guidance which defines the
principles of good enforcement and is the foundation upon which the
Council’s own enforcement policy is based. Removal of the
early repayment discount would be contrary to these existing agreed
Policies and guidance.

o  
The Council currently applies an early repayment
discount to all FPNs issued. Should the Council wish to depart from
its current position and implement the removal of the early
repayment contrary to national standard practice, it should ensure
that its reasons for doing so are reasonable and
proportionate.

o  
To remove the early repayment discount would trigger
a review and update of the Council’s enforcement
policy.

o  
The provision of an early repayment discount
encourages offenders to discharge their liability for the offence
in lieu of prosecution. When set at an appropriate level the
receipt of payment at a reduced level provides an incentive to make
payment and indicates an effective deterrent against future
offending. The receipt of payment of FPNs provides income to the
authority that is ringfenced for spending on specific environmental
functions and in turn contributing to a reduction in the
administrative burden of tracking fines paid and seeking payment
from offenders. 

o  
Unpaid FPNs will be prosecuted in the relevant
Court. Courts will seek to ensure that any local authority
prosecutions are only brought before them when the enforcing
authority has exhausted all other reasonable measures when offering
sanctions for an offence, as described in the Council’s
enforcement policy. Offering early repayment period is seen as
standard practice when dealing with offences where a fixed penalty
can be offered.

o  
Removal of this option may increase the number of
FPNs that are not paid. This will require an increase in resources
of local authority officers both from legal and waste management
teams in preparing and prosecuting cases in court.

o  
The impact of an increased number of prosecutions is
the increase of the court to exercise their discretion for
sentencing of offenders in these cases. Historically where
prosecutions locally are successful, the level of fine imposed by
the court is far lower than the amount of an FPN, even with an
early repayment discount applied. Officers routinely include an
impact statement to the court which details the officer time,
clean-up costs and other associated expenses, however it is rare
that Courts order repayment of the full and true costs to the
authority.

o  
The last prosecution by the Council for the offence
of fly tipping that went to Magistrates Court, where an FPN of
£400 had not been paid, was concluded with the offender
entering a guilty plea. This matter had twenty-three hours of legal
officer time recorded. The average fee from the Government
guideline solicitors' rates is £231 per hour.  This matter would have incurred an approximate
cost at average guideline rates of over £5,300. The court
issued a fine of £400 and a contribution towards costs of
£150.