Now listen to this. A few weeks ago I saw a dog in Ford Park pooping on our field, it was off the lead and it's owner was turning her car around at our passing place, oblivious of what her dog was up to. Once she had turned her car round she got out of the car and called to her dog, which went bounding off in the direction of the car. I called out to the owner, but she chose to ignore me, opened the back of the car, the dog jumped in and she got back into her car sill ignoring me and drove off. I took the registration of the car, noted the position of the dog turd and went to report this to the SLDC dept. that deals with this sort of thing.
They were very pleased to receive my call, especially as I had the persons vehicle reg. They would pass this on to the enforcement officer, and told me that someone would come to clean up the mess and that they would keep me informed of the progress of tracing and prosecuting the owner. I marked the turd with a stake with the vehicle reg written on it. That was the last I heard, and it slipped from my mind.
Then yesterday I had a guy from SLDC come round to Ford Park to look at some hazardous waste we want to get rid of. In conversation it turned out that this person was actually the SLDC enforcement officer who was responsible for catching people who let their dogs foul public areas, among other things. Oh, that's interesting I said, and told him about the incident above. He was new to the job, but remembered this coming in, in the first week he started. He then went on to tell me that they had been unable to proceed with any prosecution because, and get this, because of DATA PROTECTION. Although they could trace the make of the car they were not allowed to know where the owner lived, or who they were.
So what's the bloody point, how ridiculous. What sort of a joke society have we got here. I had all the evidence save a movie, although I suppose that would have breached her human rights.
So much for the Big Society.
I feel a campaign coming on.
They were very pleased to receive my call, especially as I had the persons vehicle reg. They would pass this on to the enforcement officer, and told me that someone would come to clean up the mess and that they would keep me informed of the progress of tracing and prosecuting the owner. I marked the turd with a stake with the vehicle reg written on it. That was the last I heard, and it slipped from my mind.
Then yesterday I had a guy from SLDC come round to Ford Park to look at some hazardous waste we want to get rid of. In conversation it turned out that this person was actually the SLDC enforcement officer who was responsible for catching people who let their dogs foul public areas, among other things. Oh, that's interesting I said, and told him about the incident above. He was new to the job, but remembered this coming in, in the first week he started. He then went on to tell me that they had been unable to proceed with any prosecution because, and get this, because of DATA PROTECTION. Although they could trace the make of the car they were not allowed to know where the owner lived, or who they were.
So what's the bloody point, how ridiculous. What sort of a joke society have we got here. I had all the evidence save a movie, although I suppose that would have breached her human rights.
So much for the Big Society.
I feel a campaign coming on.
Well done Councillor Col- I'm with you - count me in. I'll check my contacts in Ulverston Police to find out what the position is and what if anything can be done.
ReplyDeletePreviously I have been told that if I capture on camera someone on a mobile phone whilst driving, then the police will support my prosecution.
I can see them refusing to reveal who the car owner is to you but am sadly surprised that the SLDC officer is not following it up.
What I understand you to be saying is that the police will not even reveal an identity to the SLDC officer even though he might wish to prosecute with you as a witness.
One other thing that occurs to me is that without other backing evidence your case is very weak - you might have got the number wrong, you might be wishing to harrass a neighbour with false evidence.
What I would wish for is that the culprit is told that someone claims that she was seen even though no charges are being pressed for lack of corroborating evidence. This might cause her to think twice.
The other route could be DNA evidence of the dog shit ( at your own cost - then I suppose you could be accused of putting it there!
You need to carry a camera on your belt as I do - and become really unpopular!