Issue - meetings

Report ES14027

Report ES14027 recommended an extension to the enforcement service provided by Ward Security for serving fixed penalty notices (FPNs) for littering and dog fouling offences.

The original contract with XFOR Local Authority Support Ltd (XFOR), and subsequently Kingdom Security Ltd  (KSL), was expected to be cost neutral, but sufficient costs had not been recovered due to non-payment of FPNs and additional resource pressures on the Council’s Legal, Finance and Streetscene teams supporting the pilot. Since transferring service delivery to Ward Security, the number of tickets issued per month had fallen and this, along with the latest average recovery rate, indicated additional costs until

31^st May 2014.

In view of the delay on a new agreement it was not possible to assess the effectiveness of the fixed fee arrangement to inform options for the procurement strategy. As such extending the arrangement with Ward Security to 31 August 2014 would allow a review/analysis to enable a robust procurement strategy to be developed, including consideration of other related enforcement functions and possible joint working with neighbouring authorities.

Members made a number of comments including concern for the rate of recovery i.e. payment of FPN fines. Councillor Ellis felt the contract was not meeting expectations. Councillor Adams shared the disappointment, being particularly concerned about dog fouling. Councillor Getgood suggested the contract had raised expectations too highly. Councillor Rideout suggested a “clean it up” stencil is etched on to pavements.

Benefits of online reporting via “Fix my Street” were highlighted. Ward Security personnel were tasked with patrolling “hot spot” streets. The presence and awareness of enforcement staff could provide a significant deterrent. More fines might be paid with an early payment discount and officers could look into this. Offenders had also given false names and addresses or had refused to provide details. In such cases an enforcement officer can radio for police or PCSO assistance. Such offenders are also captured on video footage through a body camera worn by the enforcement officer. The Vice-Chairman suggested that images are shared with local police and safer neighbourhood teams to help identify offenders. If identified the offenders should be prosecuted to increase deterrence. In cases of dog fouling Councillor Rideout suggested identification by means of a chip on the dog identifying the animal’s owner. Councillor Grainger suggested that it might be possible to stand down some enforcement officers in the middle of the day should enforcement against dog fouling be focused during early mornings and evenings. He also recommended no action against those subsequently picking up litter they had dropped. Officers would also look into whether the feeding of pigeons could be regarded as a litter offence.

Suggesting there were probably more litter offences outside of town centres, Councillor Grainger felt it might be possible to reduce the level of enforcement if there were more litter bins. He asked for more detail on the costs of emptying bins, and the provision of new bins. The Chairman suggested that if bins overflow, blown litter could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45