Non-smoking woman forced to pay £650 fine for dropping cigarette in town she’d never been to

I’d be annoyed, but I’d keep a cool head and deal with it. Because life is like that sometimes.

Trent?

“I still fail to see how this is BB worthy, and not just regional news.”

As a result of human error Boing Boing wrongly posted something that you failed to find BB worthy. We are deeply sorry for any distress caused by this regrettable incident and have arranged for the author of the post to receive a stern talking to. We have taken steps to avoid this happening in future.

29 Likes

25 Likes

She did keep her cool, but first she had to pay the fine. Then she did what I’d do, which was to publicize how she had to pay a fine for someone else. It’s ridiculous to tie a littering fine to the possession of one’s vehicle.

In all my BBC reading, there are two things that I’ve noticed. First, there are a lot of stabbings in UK. And second, the government only takes care of things (i.e., apologizes) after someone in the media helps out.

Bureaucracy is universal.

4 Likes

Exactly.

1 Like

Agree that that is the real story in this article.

2 Likes

This is why you need to keep an angle grinder around. How many clamps are they willing to lose before they give up? Probably more than £650.

1 Like

Is there no such charge as “destruction of public property” in the UK?

1 Like

You might find that harder if, perhaps, you lost he use of your car, couldn’t get to work, and got fired. Didn’t happen here but definitely a reason to publicize the fact that such things could happen

7 Likes

See previous post.

1 Like

No! You should stand by your guns! How can you back down on such an important public interest issue!
I’m… disappointed.

2 Likes

What I don’t get is the fact that if the lady was a smoker, even only occasionally, it’s not that hard to tell: aroma of tobacco smoke (which is difficult to get out), butts, ashtrays, scorches where butts were stubbed out, etc. It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes.

It’s not actually a hypothetical, at least for me.

The ads I see on this story include “Jaw Dropping Photos of 13 Adult Stars as Teens.” I haven’t, and am not about to, click through, but that’s some creepy, borderline pedophile-y, Daily Mail level crap right there.

Seriously, maybe there’s some regional variation to what BB’s ad network serves up or I’m otherwise special, but lately almost every story has something that seems very antithetical to what I’d have thought BB stands for. Sleazy, exploitive, slut-shaming, negative stuff. It’s a shame.

I particularly remember a story about a teenage girl sent home by junior high administrators for tight leggings or a dress or something that “distracted boys”, bravely standing up to sexism and slut-shaming. The BB write-up about the case was very positive and supportive, and condemned the school administrators - and right next to two ads that were absolutely worthy of the same level of condemnation.

6 Likes

It’s pretty hard to prove a negative. The bailiff should have had something resembling proof that could be refuted.

3 Likes

IANA Legal Expert, but bailiffs in the UK have the power to seize property with equal value to the debt, including vehicles parked where they can get at them. Also the woman in question *should* have been notified of the debt prior to them turning up, and given 7 days notice before they arrived, but given the level of fuckery involved at every stage, it’s entirely likely neither of those happened.

Turns out getting your car towed isn’t even the worst that can happen - they can seek criminal conviction for unpaid littering fixed penalties!

7 Likes

So, if she had happened to be a smoker, that would be positive proof that the was this other person?

A bailiff is not a constable. They are effectively licensed debt collectors and writ servers.
In England and Wales (don’t know about Scotland) all police officers with powers of arrest are constables regardless of rank. Bailiffs come in 4 different grades:
UK Government website
Note the legal requirement to give 7 days’ notice. Unfortunately it is hard to prove that this requirement hasn’t been fulfilled.

4 Likes

A bailiff is not an investigator; their job is to enforce court orders. Making decisions about guilt or innocence forms no part of their duties. They aren’t trained for it, and they lack the legal authority to do so.

Yes, there was a fuckup, but the fuckup happened before the bailiff got their instructions, not after. Blaming the bailiff for this is like blaming a prison guard for not closely investigating every prisoner who claims to be wrongly convicted.

OTOH, £650 for littering in an urban area? Holy shit…

2 Likes

I imagine that wasn’t the initial fine, if the English system is anything like the sheriffs here in Victoria - cost upon cost is added to the original penalty if it remains unpaid and gets escalated until the ‘highest authority’ acts.

2 Likes