Community wardens to get more power

6:00pm Monday 16th April 2012 in Oxford

COUNCIL wardens in Oxford could be armed with police powers from June to start handing out more on-the-spot fines.

Under the move it will also be an offence to refuse to give one of Oxford City Council’s 10 community wardens a name and address.

The authority, which has begun training staff, will be the first in the Thames Valley to have the powers.

Currently wardens can issue £80 fines for littering, fly posting and graffiti and £50 for dog fouling.

But if the bid is approved by Thames Valley Police, they will be able to hand out £30 fines to cyclists riding on footpaths and confiscate alcohol and tobacco from youngsters.

They will also be able to request names and addresses of those behaving anti- socially.

Laurie-Jane Taylor, team leader for the council’s community response team, said the Community Safety Accreditation Scheme would give the wardens more authority when tackling antisocial behaviour.

She said: “The main reason is that it will give us that recognition within the community.

“Obviously we aren’t the police and we aren’t coming in from that perspective. We want to ease and prevent anti-social behaviour.

“It’s about having the acknowledgement from them (offenders) that we do have the authority to deal with certain issues.”

The wardens will also be able to request a name and address for any fixed-penalty-notice and to refuse would be an offence.

Oxford police commander, Acting Superintendent Chris Sharp, said he was fully behind the move.

“It will support us and help PCSOs in their duties,” said Mr Sharp.

Superintendent Amanda Pearson, Local Police Area Commander for Oxford, is set to approve the accreditation by June.

But Andy Viney, secretary of the Thames Valley Police Federation, said it was important to leave policing to police officers.

He said: “We are sceptical as to the end motives of what the local authority is trying to achieve.

“We are quite happy for members of the extended police family to have certain powers providing these powers don’t effectively make them constables.

“This will lead to considerable confusion from the public about who is who and what they can and what they can’t do.”

Comments(20)

Feelingsmatter says...
6:08pm Mon 16 Apr 12

As predicted, they are replacing qualified, trained police officers because it's cheaper. Just like they replaced RGNs with Health Care Assistants in the NHS, and look where that's got us.

Report this post »

Dilligaf2010 says...
6:27pm Mon 16 Apr 12

"Currently wardens can issue £80 fines for littering, fly posting and graffiti and £50 for dog fouling.".......
.......So dropping a cigarette butt, is considered more heinous than allowing your dog to foul the pavement?
I think the fine for dog fouling should be a minimum of £1000, or 6 months in irons....

Report this post »

Oxford1981 says...
6:35pm Mon 16 Apr 12

Just do ur job and leave it to the pro, because you will be calling the for backup anyway so don't was our money on stupidity

Report this post »

brianbbleys says...
7:50pm Mon 16 Apr 12

I'm totally against the idea that Oxford City Council's private security guards being given these powers which should be given to PCSO's instead. they already ride around with CCTV cameras on/in their vehicles covertly filming residents behaviour. you never see these 'Community Wardens' walking around as they used to. it would be interesting to know what PCSOs' are permitted to do against what the socalled community warden are allowed

Report this post »

L0RD PETER McVEY OX2 6EG says...
7:56pm Mon 16 Apr 12

What next, they will accept video from your neighbours phone of you watering your lawn. What a bunch of wimps we are now in England. The mast spied on, the most regulated, and the most victimised people in the "free world". and we have the cheek to critisize other countries for their policies. Stand up people before they start building houses with built in CCTV.

Report this post »

JanetJ says...
8:03pm Mon 16 Apr 12

What exactly do the wardens do now?

Report this post »

L0RD PETER McVEY OX2 6EG says...
8:40pm Mon 16 Apr 12

JanetJ wrote:
What exactly do the wardens do now?
Fine 65+ year old men and middle class women for littering, knowing that they can't fight back, and run away from a group of kids trashing the area who will fight back.

Report this post »

Oflife says...
9:51pm Mon 16 Apr 12

@L0RD PETER McVEY You are spot on Sir. Sadly, this is for profit law and order, and you can betcha they will be milking money from innocent foreign cyclists who ride through cornmarket street (i've shot video of this happening) whilst bike thieves and drug dealers continue to blight all areas of this city.

Report this post »

Oflife says...
10:00pm Mon 16 Apr 12

One must ask all readers of the Oxford Mail, hand on heart, to confirm if they have ever - in their lifetimes, witnessed a police officer or PCO WITNESSING never mind issuing a fine for catching someone in the act of a) Applying graffiti, b) Dog fouling c) Fly posting. You won't be able to. But if there were more real police on the street, such as in Jericho where drug dealers (who rob houses) are all over the place, and/or other violated locations around Oxford, we would all be grateful. Thank you.

Report this post »

Alfie Nokes says...
4:15am Tue 17 Apr 12

Can't see myself getting into any situation with these but whereas I would assist a constable in his duty to uphold the laws of the land, I am under no obligation to give assistance to, or enter into any contract with what is effectively an agent of a for profit commericial entity.

Report this post »

Pundit says...
7:29am Tue 17 Apr 12

What is the fuss about? If people are not breaking the law they have nothing to worry about. The police have failed to control cyclists who endanger pedestrians through riding on footways - in fact seeing a PSCO let alone a real police officer is a rarity. Traffic wardens as well as police dish out parking tickets to motorists, so we already have a precendent. Don't get angry with the foot soldiers. Get angry with the police for not doing their job properly in the first place.

Report this post »

Feelingsmatter says...
9:13am Tue 17 Apr 12

Pundit said; "Don't get angry with the foot soldiers. Get angry with the police for not doing their job properly in the first place."

It's not the individuals that are being moaned about, it's the system. Although I do have a couple of points which reinforce the need for properly trained, intelligent individuals to be out on the beat;

1: My 9 year old son was shouted at for riding his cycle on the pavement by a CPSO .... who was riding his bike on the pavement. It is against the law for children under 10 to ride their cycles on the road and I was right next to him cycling on the road at the time, making sure he created no hazard to pedestrians. How we laughed!
2. The parking outside my son's school is so hazardous he almost got knocked over TWICE on the zebra crossing and a neighbour's child was reversed into while she stood on the pavement waiting to cross the road. I asked for some CPSOs to be in the area at school dropping-off time and the response was that none of them started work until 10:00.

Report this post »

DoctorBob says...
11:19am Tue 17 Apr 12

"What is the fuss about? If people are not breaking the law they have nothing to worry about...."

Oh yeah!?!? Ask the Birmingham six what they think about that?

Report this post »

Sid Hunt says...
12:58pm Tue 17 Apr 12

It is not "against the law for children under 10 to ride their cycles on the road" there is no legal minimum age just as there is no legal age to be riding on footways/footpaths. However, as the age of criminal responsibility is ten years children younger than this age can cycle on footways without being prosecuted.

That aside, what concerns me about these wardens is what is the burden of proof required for issuing of tickets e.g. what recourse is there for someone who is falsely given a ticket by a disgruntled warden? I suspect the authorities will presume that the recipient is guilty leaving the 'accused' having to decide whether to prove their innocence and risk further penalties or accept a malevolent action.

Report this post »

nobbytryard says...
9:20pm Tue 17 Apr 12

If Oxford police commander, acting superintendent Chris Sharp welcomes the idea, it's a pity he don't advise his own officers to take action on cyclists riding on the pavements. I live in Cowley 200 yards from Cowley police station, and have seen enough cyclists riding on the path between Phipps rd and the Swan to pay a police mans wages for the day in fines. They even ride past police cars parked at the traffic lights with no action taken , these are not kids either they quite often are adults wearing B.M.W works uniforms.

Report this post »

Feelingsmatter says...
9:19am Wed 18 Apr 12

"Sid Hunt says...
12:58pm Tue 17 Apr 12

It is not "against the law for children under 10 to ride their cycles on the road" there is no legal minimum age just as there is no legal age to be riding on footways/footpaths. However, as the age of criminal responsibility is ten years children younger than this age can cycle on footways without being prosecuted."

Well that's interesting, as I phoned Kidlington Police Station and was told that 10 years old was the minimum legal age to cycle on the UK carriageway. In addition, I was told that 16 is the minimum age to be prosecuted for riding on the pavement. I know cycling law is a grey area in the UK, but if even the police don't know it's a bit worrying.

Report this post »

Sid Hunt says...
1:24pm Wed 18 Apr 12

I suspect the minimum age info was based on an opinion. It's been an offence to cycle on a footway (a footpath at the side of a carriageway) since 1835 (Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835) but it does take a while for people to catch on! There is no provision for children in the act.

I think the info re 16 as the minimum age for prosecution is related to the issuing of FPNs which are used to fine cyclists on footways. Several forces do not issue FPNs to under 16s but a look at TVP web site shows that FPNs "are one-off fines that can be issued to anyone over the age of 10 who is behaving anti-socially" - I assume that the anti-social aspect is subject to the opinion of the observer.

FPNs for disorder have a minimum issue age of 16 and are "issued for low-level disorder, such as throwing fireworks and being drunk and disorderly")

BTW The law doesn't apply to footpaths away from carriageways - cyclists do not have a right to cycle on these but the footpath has to be subject to a local bye-law or traffic regulation for an offence to be considered - so arguing the point could be worthwhile. Cyclists can cycle on bridleways.

On the other side of the coin it is illegal to drive or park (partly or wholly) on a cycle track - I have yet to see tickets issued to the drivers of these vehicles.

Report this post »

Feelingsmatter says...
3:25pm Wed 18 Apr 12

Thanks for that Sid. Maybe I should make a citizen's arrest next time I see a CPSO riding his bike on the footpath ;)

Report this post »

L0RD PETER McVEY OX2 6EG says...
5:43pm Wed 18 Apr 12

Feelingsmatter wrote:
Thanks for that Sid. Maybe I should make a citizen's arrest next time I see a CPSO riding his bike on the footpath ;)
No just pop your walking stick between the spokes of his wheel. That would make a national headline if plod decided to take you to court for assault, and would have the added bonus of making the ride on the road.

Report this post »

AlexF says...
10:58am Fri 20 Apr 12

What these wardens are permitted to do is illegal.
In the 1689 constitutional bill of rights it states that on the spot fines are illegal without prior conviction!
People need to quote this more often as it will deter these little Hitlers from dishing out fines that can't be dished out, unless it's in/via court.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree