We do not (currently) use any form of financial penalty for bin related issues. RUGBY BOROUGH COUNCIL I believe we have served several Fixed Penalty Notices under S46 EPA, since 2006 mainly for leaving their bins out on non-collection days or on the highway. READING BOROUGH COUNCIL The team need to be aware that the Deregulation Bill is due to amend the criminal offence under section 46 to a civil offence – no timescales yet but I believe this is imminent. Just thought it was worth flagging up before they do a whole load of work to amend their processes. In Stockport we have successfully served FPNs and subsequently prosecuted for nonpayment of the FPN. We issue warning letters / door knock to educate. Repeated incidents are followed up with a Notice served on each named householder within the property. Repeated incidents are recorded (photographed) and where evidence is found (letters etc.) we invite the householder in for an interview under PACE and establish the facts / mitigation etc. We then decide whether to serve an FPN. A non-payment of an FPN goes straight to the magistrates because by then we know we have enough evidence to prosecute (otherwise we would not have served the FPN in the first place) STOCKPORT COUNCIL At Rochdale we have never prosecuted anyone for the misuse of their recycling bins and we do use the big stick message in some of our leaflets and campaigns with a threat of possible prosecution using section 46 notices, and possible fines of £75. The process to prosecute someone is very complex and the evidence needed is difficult to secure when residents can claim that it has been contaminated with other waste streams whilst out on the street presented for collection from passes by or neighbours. Full sampling of the bin contents may be required to identify the source of contamination and try to identify from addressed communication We are concentrating more on the Right Stuff in the Right bin and this is our main campaign at the moment which is in partnership with Greater Manchester waste. I have attached the leaflet (SEE ATTACHMENT) which is posted out to all residents within the campaign areas which includes the possible fine that could be imposed. ROCHDALE BOROUGH COUNCIL We have served thousands of advisory letters to residents encouraging correct use of recycling containers. Letters are delivered to problem areas on an annual basis. We serve S46 notices within that year for non-compliance, and these do include references to recyclate and separation; however, we are yet to take any enforcement action for noncompliance. Advice we have seen previously is that the offender is the person who placed the waste out incorrectly therefore this is very difficult to establish, particularly in larger shared properties. We also have a similar problem with side waste complaints, particularly in terraced areas, as residents remove waste from other bins to accommodate their own, so it is not as straight forward as searching the bags on the floor and taking action against the bag owner. We are now insisting that all bins are marked up before delivery so that any left on the street can be identified. However, as bins can be placed out from 7pm the night before collection, there is still a wide window of opportunity for those who have excess waste. This area of enforcement is a nightmare, but a significant source of complaint, so we also look forward to feedback on how other authorities are handling the problem. CITY OF YORK COUNCIL I agree enforcement of S46 notices can be problematic – but just as with any other offence, the investigation needs to cover all the points includingWas the occupier served the notice? Was the notice worded correctly? Why did the occupier’s actions contravene the notice? What evidence do you have that supports this? I’d suggest that the gathering of evidence starts with seeing a misused bin, e.g. waste in it that is prohibited by the S46 notice. The occupier needs to be interviewed to establish that he did put that material in the bin. If he admits it – fine, go ahead and consider whether an FPN is appropriate or whether a prosecution is justified. If he doesn’t admit it (and there are no witnesses) then there is no case. SHEFFIELD CITY COUNCIL In my previous Local Authority, we did prosecute a person for side waste (about 2009), however in Bedford it is not dealt with as a priority. We monitor quarterly reports of bins issues and target hotspots. We have issued Notices but as yet no prosecutions as FPN’s tend to be paid. FPN’s for obstruction offences / bins left out rather than contamination and yes it is problematic proving who contaminated, resident or a passer-by if bins out. BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL