Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

PCSO stuff ONLY: Burning issues, high profile questions or cases that have been highlighted in national or local news, let's talk about them IN HERE! A link to the item would be great where possible.

Moderator: national-PCSOs

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:16 pm

. . . . . Hello Community Resolutions.

As of 8th December my force won't be issuing tickets for ASB, D & D, and damage (amongst other things) but will be issuing Community Resolutions. Tickets will still be used for dog fouling and littering (if the council gives us them) and vehicle obstruction and parking on pavements.

If there's any of you who, like me, haven't got a great understanding of CR's already, I hope the following may be of use.

I asked what I was supposed to do as PCSO's don't have the powers to issue CR's and the answer was that supervision from Sgt upwards can authorise us issuing them.
I then asked what to do if I encountered someone swearing in the street & they refused to stop. Apparently I'm expected to detain & shout up for a PC. Practically speaking, I can't see getting much of a response. I'm particularly miffed at that because I like the instant justice aspect of a PND and that it's visible and obvious to anyone witnessing it.

Apparently this has come about because the majority of tickets go unpaid. I can't help thinking that the non payers should be pursued more vigorously, rather than move to what seems a soft option. One of the examples given was a damage of £300. The offender gets a CR (after we've convinced the victim that this is an good outcome. The victim doesn't have to agree but the CR can still be issued. The offender has to agree and admit his guilt) where he must pay the cost. If he can't afford £300 then we're expected to persuade the victim to accept what he can pay, e.g. £200. I'm sorry. But if I had say, some windows broken, I'd expect the offender to pay in full and not be a penny out of pocket. I'd even expect some compensation on top and as for a letter of apology, he can stick that where the sun doesn't shine.

So, what happens if the CR is breached? The offender can be arrested for the new offence and will go to court for the original offence. Breaching the CR is not a criminal offence in itself.

That's as far as my understanding goes. I turned up for work this morning to be told we were getting training in CR's. The full training is about 4 hours. The condensed version is about 90 minutes. We got about 45 minutes.
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

User avatar
naughtygoose
Official Member
Official Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:16 am

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by naughtygoose » Tue Nov 25, 2014 11:16 pm

In your example about the windows, who decides what the cr would be? For example would cps decide how much the offender would pay?

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:32 pm

You decide. You sort of "negotiate" how much the offender can afford to pay per week/month or all at once. The CR can't run for more than 16 weeks, we've learnt today, & it's a 12 month pilot scheme which, being cynical, will be determined a success because the force & the courts want it to be a success.

The things that stick in my throat i that whilst the offender can agree or not agree to a CR, you can still go ahead with one even if the victim doesn't really agree. You have to persuade them that it's the best option. If a ticket is issued correctly then it shouldn't go unpaid. CR's feel like a soft option as in "you naughty boy, don't so it again". I'd rather see a system brought in that is more victim led, that has the victim at the centre of our actions rather than, as it currently feels, the offender.
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

User avatar
ninjamonk
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:34 pm

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by ninjamonk » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:39 pm

Is this not restorative justice ?

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Thu Nov 27, 2014 6:27 pm

That's what it's called. It may be fine for minor things such as bullying amongst teenagers, neighbour disputes and the like, but I don't think it's appropriate for criminal damage. As for burglars being made to understand the impact that their crime has on the victim, they already know. They just don't care.
It feels that CR has been designed to free up courts in the same way that non-custodial sentences are used more and more to ease the pressure on prisons. If the prisons are full, build more. If the courts are struggling with the numbers of offenders appearing before them, hold more courts or extend their operating hours.
I've seen the stats about re-offending and CR's. However, the Home Office's own stats show that the longer the custodial sentence the lower the re-offending rate compared with non-custodials such as community service.
Do the politicians seriously think that some toe rag after being caught burgling and given a CR will see it as anything but a let off? If burglars re-offend after say, 6 months or more in prison, they'll certainly do it after a weak and pathetic CR. I've been to umpteen burglary scenes whilst in SOCO and see the utter devastation felt by the victims; the feeling of their privacy ripped apart, the loss of a sense of security, the fear of it happening again, the sense of having had their home and belongings violated, never mind the financial impact of damaged and stolen belongings. A face to face meeting, a forced letter of apology and a grudgingly made promise not to do it again is ridiculous.
Even with a first time offender (well, the first time he's been caught), I'm more of the opinion that a custodial sentence (prison or YOI etc) will be more of a deterrent against re-offending and discouraging others. Make the prisons, YOI's etc unpleasant places to be. Not brutal or harsh, but hard. No automatic privileges such as TV or 50% remission. Give them basic education of reading, writing, maths; teach them work skills. Teach them discipline and how to be a responsible productive member of society. Teach them how to take care of themselves - managing money, preparing meals, personal hygiene etc.
I know that one of the problems with re-offending is that on release the criminal goes back to the environment he came from. I think that if the above is done, at least he has the knowledge and skills to avoid returning to criminality.
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

Acorn
Official Member
Official Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:09 am
Class: 'Ranger Varient'
Sacred: 'Ranger'
Location: HM realm of Iglooland

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by Acorn » Sun Nov 30, 2014 2:51 pm

powdermonkey wrote:That's what it's called. It may be fine for minor things such as bullying amongst teenagers, neighbour disputes and the like, but I don't think it's appropriate for criminal damage. As for burglars being made to understand the impact that their crime has on the victim, they already know. They just don't care.
It feels that CR has been designed to free up courts in the same way that non-custodial sentences are used more and more to ease the pressure on prisons. If the prisons are full, build more. If the courts are struggling with the numbers of offenders appearing before them, hold more courts or extend their operating hours.
That was beautiful :slcl2:

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Mon Dec 01, 2014 2:02 am

Acorn,

Thank you for your kind words!
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

User avatar
ninjamonk
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:34 pm

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by ninjamonk » Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:22 pm

RJ has been around for some years now it has been used for shoplifting,criminal damage , dog offences and other low level offences. I feel it has been misuded from time to time and just being used as a quick disposal to which I feel it shouldn't as that's when it just looses the meaning behind restorative justice.

the dark lord
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:04 pm

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by the dark lord » Wed Dec 03, 2014 11:45 am

As a victim and taking your example of a Broken window costing £300.

Billy the Scruff is 16 years of age, in a fit of anger he throws the brick he had found in his hand through my window. This is observed by the local constabulary who come along and detain young Billy. Because Mr Scruff has only ever done the same thing and been caught once before he is eligble for a final warning. Which is lovely for the police, but not so lovely for me and my wallet. However on the occasion TPM comes along, rewinds time and visits me and offers me a a CR where young Mr Scruff will forgo 15 tenner bags and give me half of the cost (god only knows why he would do this as a caution or a final warning would cost him nothing). This is £150 more than I would get if he was given a caution or final warning. So makes my wallet feel a little better.

From a purely business point of view for the victim the CR makes sense.

JimmyRiddle
Elite Member
Elite Member
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 6:59 pm

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by JimmyRiddle » Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:20 am

This is a joke. We are doing everything in our power NOT to actually take anyone to court. I mean, our force uses restorative justice (in a disgusting way), CRs and now another one lower down called Police Resolution (PR).
Power of arrest for PCSOs for 'as and when' - s24a PACE & common law (i.e. BoP) using s3 CLA 1967

I'm a PCSO, I will WATCH you get your head kicked in (as per force policy)

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:15 pm

The galling thing is that it's described as being "victim focussed".
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

Acorn
Official Member
Official Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:09 am
Class: 'Ranger Varient'
Sacred: 'Ranger'
Location: HM realm of Iglooland

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by Acorn » Mon Dec 08, 2014 6:53 pm

JimmyRiddle wrote:This is a joke. We are doing everything in our power NOT to actually take anyone to court.
That sucks, on this side of the pond, they want to bring before the Courts anyone whom I catch fly posting a second time in a 12mos. period.

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by powdermonkey » Mon Dec 08, 2014 10:15 pm

Well, it's happened sooner than I thought but there's a chance I'll be issuing a CR tomorrow. Here's the story. A woman has contacted police to say that she's had her windows egged almost every other day for the last week or so and has seen the 16 year old offender doing it and names him. He's called Oliver. Not only that, but she spoke to the local shop owner who told her that not long before the last occasion that her windows were egged, Oliver had been in the shop and bought 6 eggs and a bag of crisps. Complainant knows Oliver and the reason for the egging. She says it's because she has banned her 13 year old daughter, Taylor, from associating with him as she feels he's a bad influence, getting her involved in ASB and giving her cigs. She went round to Oliver's house to speak to him and his parents but Oliver's parents were very defensive of him, apparently. So she phoned the police.
I know Oliver, having met him on a number of occasions and I'm not impressed with his behaviour. As mentioned, he's only 16 but has already been involved in a street robbery, is always there when I respond to a report of youths causing ASB, has graffitied (is that a word?) his name on a bus shelter and was described to a T by neighbours as being the main culprit in a group shouting, swearing and throwing stones (he's very distinctive due to his height & always wearing the same blue hoodie). His parents are both decent people, quite pro police, the house is well maintained etc.
On a recent report of ASB I found Oliver, Taylor, another boy and another girl sat in this bus shelter. I had a chat with them & advised them that I would be speaking to their parents. Each parent/guardian of the other 3 I spoke to all said more or less the same thing : Oliver is a bad influence & they'd rather their kids didn't associate with him. These 3 kids were all polite and respectful and the two girls are really nice kids. Unfortunately, Oliver is gobby, far more than your average 16 yr old lad. Even his dad acknowledges that he's gobby and that his mouth gets him into trouble. On one occasion he apparently mouthed off to some lad and got a thumping for it.
So, after chatting with my Sgt as it's my first CR I'm off to pay a visit. I doubt I'll be welcomed by his parents as they weren't best pleased to see me last time, when I told him that I would be gathering evidence with a view to obtaining an ASBO and the implications for him if I do.
The CR is going to be a bit wishy washy I admit. I was going to get him to clean the victim's windows but she has already cleaned them and she doesn't really want him at her house. Nor is she bothered about a letter of apology as she views it as meaningless if he has to be made to write one. I fully agree. So, the CR is going to have something along the lines of his not contacting her or her daughter in any way, directly or indirectly, and not causing her any nuisance or disturbance. That's if he (plus his parents) pass the attitude test and he admits his guilt and agrees to the CR. If not, my sgt's advice is to come back & confer with him and we'll devise another approach, even if that means escalating things with young Oliver. There's no offence he can be arrested for (unless I can go for S.5) - there's no lasting damage so there's no crime of Crim Dam.
I'll post again after tomorrow with the outcome.
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

Acorn
Official Member
Official Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:09 am
Class: 'Ranger Varient'
Sacred: 'Ranger'
Location: HM realm of Iglooland

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by Acorn » Tue Dec 09, 2014 1:42 am

powdermonkey, he's 16, can't you issue him a FPN for something under your council's bye laws or some health or nuisance legislation for the eggs thing?

User avatar
Big Brother
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 2:36 pm
Examiner: XIII
Location: Somewhere

Re: Bye Bye Tickets . . . .

Post by Big Brother » Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:47 am

Why don't you issue him a community protection notice instead? Have you been designated the power?

I did my first one last week, to say it has teeth is an understatement. If the lad breaches it he is issued an FPN/goes straight to court.
Big brother is watching you.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic