Man fined £1,000 for putting bins out one day early
A Labour council has been accused of acting like the 'Stasi' after fining a resident £1,000 for putting his bins out a few hours early.
Hammersmith and Fulham Council claimed Clyde Strachan had been fly-tipping when he placed rubbish sacks and a food recycling bin outside his home at noon the day before the refuse collection.
Now the west London council's 'law enforcement team' - its 'eyes and ears' - has been criticised as 'overzealous' after it refused to give an official warning despite the 37-year-old resident saying he put them out early because he was going away.
Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, rounded on the local authority.
'Instead of cracking down on genuine anti-social behaviour, the state tries to reassert itself by punishing well-meaning people for tiny infringements. It's the easy thing to do but it's counter-productive and unfair,' he told The Telegraph.
'This huge fine for putting the bins out a few hours early veers into Stasi-like control of people's lives. This man was clearly doing the right thing in the circumstances.'
Within two hours of The Telegraph contacting the council, the fine was withdrawn and town hall bosses issued a statement saying Mr Strachan, a lead engineer at a technology company, was 'not a persistent fly-tipper'.
The local authority insists that the 'number one priority' for the 72 officers in its enforcement team is keeping 'residents and visitors safe'. However, they issued more than 2,200 fines in 2024.
In May, Mr Strachan was leaving his West Kensington home for a few days and decided to help refuse collectors by putting his rubbish out shortly before midday.
'I deliberately put them out of the way on the pavement, tucked to one side against the wall so they weren't in anyone's way,' he said.
'It meant I had put them out about six or seven hours before the evening when I would normally take them there.'
When he returned from his trip he discovered an 'environmental enforcement notice' demanding he make contact.
'I spoke on the phone to one of the council officers and said I was willing to receive a warning but felt a £1,000 fine was excessive.
'I said I had put the bins out early as I was not available the next day. It was an honest mistake. I didn't feel as though I needed to grovel, but it felt like that was what he was after.'
A week later a £1,000 fixed penalty notice (FPN), with an early £500 option, arrived stating: 'There was one large box, six bags of waste, and one food bin deposited on the pavement and left. It isn't collection day so it shouldn't be there.'
The notice said: 'There is no formal right to appeal, however the council will accept representations from you within seven days…'
'It was excessive, completely shocking and quite unbelievably unfair. It feels like an abuse of their powers', Mr Strachan said, adding that he often picks up litter on the street or cleans up if a fox has ransacked bins.
Challenging the penalty
Mr Strachan challenged the penalty, claiming the 'extreme fine' was not appropriate for a 'minor infringements', adding it was tantamount to 'bullying and coercion.'
William Yarwood, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said the huge fine for such a minor transgression was 'completely disproportionate'.
'This was a clear case of an honest mistake, not fly-tipping - yet overzealous enforcement officers have treated it like a serious offence. Residents expect fair treatment, not to be targeted for trying to do the right thing.
'Councils should focus on real issues, not hammering taxpayers with excessive fines for trivial matters.'
Councillor Jose Alfonso, leader of the Tories at the council, said enforcement officers should be restricted to 'working with the police to keep our streets safe - not trying to catch residents out on technicalities'.
He said the 'contemptuous and high-handed approach' was 'the hallmark' of the Labour council.
'We thought we were getting a law enforcement team, but it appears we've ended up with a council revenue collection team.'
A council spokesman said: 'Mr Strachan asked for a review of the FPN on May 28 when he let us know that the reason he put the rubbish out early was that he had been going on holiday the following day.'
The following day, they froze the fine pending a review. 'We have since cancelled the FPN as we agree that Mr Strachan made an honest mistake and is not a persistent fly-tipper' he added, claiming officers respond to 'numerous complaints from local neighbours about fly-tipping and waste on pavements in this neighbourhood' and it acts 'both firmly and fairly when residents ask us to deal with the ugly scourge of fly-tipping.'
Council's 'eyes and ears'
The council website says the enforcement team was set up in 2021, serves as its 'eyes and ears' and is 'one of the largest' such forces in Britain.
It claims 'uniformed staff patrol the borough day and night, seven days a week,' adding that they issued 2,270 fines in 2024, but 'are not the police'.
Council taxpayers foot the team's £2.1 million annual bill.
A separate web page explains how bags should be put out 'before 6am on your normal collection day, or after 9pm on the evening before.'
It adds: 'Putting your bins out on the wrong day or in the wrong way could result in action against you for dumping rubbish.' However, that page does not mention £1,000 fines for fly-tipping.
In 2024, the council announced that it was introducing 'hefty new fines for fly-tipping' to 'act as a deterrent'. Fines were increased from £200 to £1,000, with a pledge that money raised will fund clean-up operations and 'enforcing the new rules'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Gen Z are meant to be tech-savvy... but 1.5 million admit they were duped online by social media ticket scams to see their favourite bands
Millions of supposedly tech-savvy Gen Zs admit they have been easily scammed on social media trying to get sold out tickets to see their favourite music artists. A survey found a shocking 1.5 million of the youngsters (21 per cent) admitted to being fooled online by fraudsters last summer when buying tickets for live music events. And 2.2 million of the digital natives (32 per cent) admitted to being scammed on either Facebook Marketplace or Instagram. Despite over half (52 per cent) of Gen Zs having seen an increase in suspicious ticket listings in social media since last year, they are still falling for the scams. As the most prolific social media users, they are set to lose a total of £685.9million to fraudsters tricking them online. The research by StubHub UK found that the younger generation were so desperate to get their hands on the tickets that they failed to do basic due diligence. A quarter (25 per cent) of those that were scammed admitted they didn't check the seller's identity before transferring them the money. What's more, over two in ten (21 per cent) of Gen Z also revealed they would rather risk it in a desperate bid to see their favourite act, than miss out on a must-see concert. How to avoid ticket scams 1. Buy from a trusted marketplace Always use well-established marketplaces which offer secure transactions and good customer ratings on independent review platforms like Trustpilot. 2. Check for buyer protections Ensure the platform offers guarantees against fraud, non-delivery, or cancellation 3. Make sure you can get help if you need it Look for customer support that has a human at the end of the phone, so you are supported if you have any questions or concerns. 4. Pay securely Always use a credit or debit card for additional fraud protection. Avoid bank transfers or cash payments, which offer little recourse in case of scams. 5. Verify ticket information Check that the event details, seat locations, and ticket types match what is advertised on official event pages. Avoid listings with vague information 6. Be wary of prices that seem too good to be true! If a deal looks too cheap compared to market prices, it may not be legitimate 'Remember, don't risk it! Avoid purchasing tickets from social media sites such as Facebook, TikTok and WhatsApp where your transactions are not protected and you are more vulnerable to scams,' say the experts at StubHub UK Meanwhile 30 per cent of Brits between the ages of 25-34 admitted to being scammed when buying tickets for live events last summer on social media - the equivalent of 1.4 million Millennials. It comes as UK music fans could be hit by nine million scam attempts on social media in their search for gig tickets this summer, as it's revealed almost a third (32 per cent) would resort to using social media to find last minute tickets for their favourite artists. While London sees high volumes, scammers are increasingly targeting fans in Leeds, Birmingham and Manchester, which are now the scamming hotspots outside the capital. This will likely spike ahead of major tours set to begin this summer by major artists like Oasis, Billie Eilish, Lana Del Rey and Olivia Rodrigo. The research follows hundreds of Oasis fans who have fallen victim to scams amid the rush to buy tour tickets and lost £346 on average, according to a high street bank's analysis of its own data. Lloyds Bank said hundreds of fans desperate to see the Gallagher brothers' reunion tour had fallen victim to fraudsters, with more than 90 per cent of reported cases starting with fake adverts or posts on social media. Victims have been asked to pay upfront for the tickets and once payment has been made, the scammers vanished, leaving many out of pocket. Scams involved fake adverts, posts or listings on social media, offering tickets at discounted prices or access to events that have already sold out at inflated prices, the bank said. Purchase scams can happen when someone is tricked into sending money via bank transfer to buy goods or services that are fake, shoddy or do not exist. Ticket scams often involve fake adverts, posts or listings on social media, offering tickets or access to sold-out events. Victims are asked to pay up front for the tickets, but once this is done, the scammers disappear. The buyer is left without the tickets and out of pocket.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
It's no wonder that the middle classes are fleeing Rachel Reeves's anti-wealth island
A brain drain is coming. We need to talk about emigration. Yes, you read that right, emigration – not just immigration. You heard the warnings during the Brexit wars – business and investors will leave for Paris, Frankfurt, Milan (and the Earth will stop spinning...) unless we remain in the customs union – and back then it was largely a load of hot air. But hear me out. This time, it's actually happening. Entrepreneurs and businesspeople are fleeing in their droves. In the past year alone, more than 10,000 millionaires have left the UK. Only China saw more high net-worth individuals leave. European countries are now stealing our lunch, with Italy and Portugal styling themselves as destinations for investor flight with attractive low-tax regimes. It wasn't Brexit that did it, but an economically illiterate tax regime determined to squeeze the juice dry. The best-paid 1 per cent already paid about a third of all income tax collected: those with the broadest shoulders were – and still are – bearing the greatest burden. But the Chancellor viewed successful investors and risk-taking entrepreneurs as criminals to punish, rather than assets to court. The non-dom tax changes may have polled well in focus groups, but they've backfired – and the public will now pay the price. Who is going to fund increases in defence, healthcare and transport spending? Yet again, it will fall to the middle classes to bridge the gap left. The Chancellor's ineptitude means further tax rises on working people in the autumn are now inevitable. The social contract with the middle class hasn't simply frayed – it's been shredded. They have been disproportionately targeted to fund a record tax burden while their quality of life has remained largely stagnant. They're paying more than ever to get less than ever in return. The public services they use are crumbling, the streets they walk feel less safe, and the town centres they visit are hollowed out by petty crime and boarded-up shopfronts. In France, discontent leads to riots; in Britain, it seems to dissipate into despair. The very real risk now is that Brits vote with their feet and simply pack up and leave en masse. A recent poll showed that nearly a quarter of UK adults are considering moving abroad in the next five years. These are highly skilled professionals who are the bedrock of any country: 48 per cent of those in the IT industry are considering emigrating, as are 30 per cent of those in the healthcare sector. And it's not just white-collar workers, either – when I speak to tradesmen, they think they would have far better prospects in countries such as Australia and Canada. This is no longer an issue of investor flight, but a full-on brain drain. In the 1970s, a high-tax and anti-business environment led to Britain experiencing a net loss of 500,000 people. Half a century later, history could well repeat itself. Even my generation, now pushing into our 40s, who didn't feel like we had it particularly good entering the jobs market in the 2000s, and with the massive house-price boom of that period, had it so much better. When I speak at universities, I am struck by how many are contemplating opportunities abroad. And who can blame them? Young graduates today pay more than ever to live in tiny bedrooms in shared flats. The prospect of homeownership – or starting a family – has never been more distant. Unlike previously, the alternatives to the UK are increasingly appealing. Their money can go further elsewhere, and they can live in more prosperous countries with a better quality of life. In 2007, the average Brit was richer than the average American, Australian, Austrian, Belgian, Canadian and German, to name just a few. Now, they have all overtaken us. And it's not just them. Finland, the UAE, Hong Kong and Israel have all sailed past us when it comes to GDP per capita. A failed policy consensus of the past 20 years has driven this country into decline – and now the consequences are upon us. We won't return to being a country of net emigration anytime soon. Quite the opposite: Starmer's immigration White Paper was a recipe for more mass legal and illegal migration. That means hundreds of thousands more migrants who, over their lifetime, will take out more then they put in – many of whom are from culturally divergent countries. Meanwhile, net contributors are pushed towards the exit. On average, a millionaire leaves the country every 45 minutes, while an illegal migrant enters the country every 15 minutes. It's the most brain-dead migration policy imaginable. I don't just fear for the raw economic consequences. If middle-class flight takes off, the foot will slam on the accelerator driving the dizzying pace of change. Brits who have grown up here and are imbued with our history, heritage, culture, customs and traditions can't simply be swapped like-for-like. Nations, like all good things, take an age to create but are easily destroyed. Many Brits can sense that the country they love is slipping away: at first gradually, then suddenly. I understand why people consider leaving the UK, although I could never, ever imagine it myself. I too despair sometimes, but I care too much to just shrug my shoulders and resign myself to defeat. We have a fight on our hands to turn this country around. But safe streets, cohesive communities, cheap energy, functioning public services, higher wages and a startup culture are never unobtainable. For all our problems, this is a great country – and I'm convinced we can be greater still.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
UK ministers delay AI regulation amid plans for more ‘comprehensive' bill
Proposals to regulate artificial intelligence have been delayed by at least a year as UK ministers plan a bumper bill to regulate the technology and its use of copyrighted material. Peter Kyle, the technology secretary, intends to introduce a 'comprehensive' AI bill in the next parliamentary session to address concerns about issues including safety and copyright. This will not be ready before the next king's speech, and is likely to trigger concerns about delays to regulating the technology. The date for the next king's speech has not been set but several sources said it could take place in May 2026. Labour had originally planned to introduce a short, narrowly-drafted AI bill within months of entering office that would have been focused on large language models, such as ChatGPT. The legislation would have required companies to hand over their models for testing by the UK's AI Security Institute. It was intended to address concerns that AI models could become so advanced that they posed a risk to humanity. This bill was delayed, with ministers choosing to wait and align with Donald Trump's administration in the US because of concerns that any regulation might weaken the UK's attractiveness to AI companies. Ministers now want to include copyright rules for AI companies as part of the AI bill. 'We feel we can use that vehicle to find a solution on copyright,' a government source said. 'We've been having meetings with both creators and tech people and there are interesting ideas on moving forward. That work will begin in earnest once the data bill passes.' The government is already locked in a standoff with the House of Lords over copyright rules in a separate data bill. It would allow AI companies to train their models using copyrighted material unless the rights holder opts out. It has caused a fierce backlash from the creative sector, with artists including Elton John, Paul McCartney and Kate Bush throwing their weight behind a campaign to oppose the changes. This week, peers backed an amendment to the data bill that would require AI companies to disclose if they were using copyrighted material to train their models, in an attempt to enforce current copyright law. Ministers have refused to back down, however, even though Kyle has expressed regret about the way the government has gone about the changes. The government insists the data bill is not the right vehicle for the copyright issue and has promised to publish an economic impact assessment and series of technical reports on copyright and AI issues. Beeban Kidron, the film director and crossbench peer who has been campaigning on behalf of the creative sector, said on Friday that ministers 'have shafted the creative industries, and they have proved willing to decimate the UK's second-biggest industrial sector'. Kyle told the Commons last month that AI and copyright should be dealt with as part of a separate 'comprehensive' bill. Most of the UK public (88%) believe the government should have the power to stop the use of an AI product if it is deemed to pose a serious risk, according to a survey published by the Ada Lovelace Institute and the Alan Turing Institute in March. More than 75% said the government or regulators should oversee AI safety rather than private companies alone.
