Almost 400 people have signed a petition calling on the city council to end its contract with 3GS after its enforcement officers fined people up to £600 for putting a couple of cardboard boxes in the wrong bin.
Alison Mapletoft, who makes cushions from her Hove home, started the petition after being fined £600 for “dumping trade waste” – i.e. putting a single cardboard box in a council recycling bin. Her offence and others were unearthed by officers going through the bin to find boxes addressed to businesses.
Her MP, Peter Kyle, says he is seeking a meeting with 3GS to discuss the lack of flexibility in the scheme, which makes no distinction between a home worker recycling one box and a large business fly-tipping.
And he is also seeking more focus on “real” areas of fly-tipping where dumped rubbish blights areas such as Hangleton and North Portslade.
Mrs Mapletoft said: “Countless Brighton and Hove residents, acting in good faith, have been fined under a system that was designed to target fly-tippers.
“Residents who accidentally put cardboard from small businesses (such as home run businesses) in domestic recycling bins, were fined up to £600 Ppe cardboard box. This is still ongoing and flies in the face of common sense.
“Tactics used by 3GS on residents who have used the wrong bins (not fly tippers) have included intimidation – using ‘officers’ and cameras. Threatening letters mentioning imminent court appearances, repeated emails containing obscure incomprehensible language.
“We maintain that the fine is out of proportion. We believe the treatment is unnecessary.”
Mr Kyle said: “the guidance allows for a maximum of £400, Brighton and Hove City Council imposes a fine of £300. I find this unsatisfactory, because there is no differentiation made between a large business fly-tipping (we would all agree this is bad) and a small business/sole trader who disposes of one box in an environmentally-friendly way.
“There needs to be more flexibility in the system and more focus on the real areas of fly-tipping (eg Hangleton and North Portlade) and punishing fly-tippers which blight areas (as opposed to sole-traders putting a box in recycling bins).”
Brighton and Hove City Council has previously said that it is an offence for businesses to use domestic waste facilities, and that it works closely with 3GS to make sure that fines are correctly issued with the necessary evidence.
3GS said its officers are well trained and act responsibly and with humility.
The Council have a bad record of dealing with businesses.Millions lost by parking meter company.Jimmys restaurant unpaid business rates etc Have they checked out 3GS ?Google has a lot of information on companies loss,profitability and net worth.Does the Council check out Companies they are doing business with?
Sorry I am bit late to the show – some thoughts that came to mind.
If we accept that the use of these powers is disproportionate in this case of the use of household waste/recycling services by particular home businesses – and we also accept the following issues (listed in the section below the line), it would seem there is a need to take more consideration of how society both supports the needs of home/small enterprises while fairly recovering associated costs placed on household waste/recycling services. While also considering the above in context of the ongoing transitioning from a linear to a circular economy and the changing socio-economic environment predicated for the next few decades.
To this end I would suggest that small/home businesses are allowed to use household services for no direct charge up to a certain weight/volume threshold – with central government support for local authorities to manage this waste (communal street bins may still pose more of a problem, but as covered below the is a largely unconsidered issue with individual house services).
UK Gov. could assess the holistic benefit of home business activity to the economy/society when setting a threshold for waste/recycling service use – agreeing a formula (which admittedly could be complicated e.g. utilising HMRC data exiting and new, or very simple e.g. linked to existing funding calculations, depending on how this is done and the value share assumed for the local authorities vs. UK Gov. centrally) that will provide councils additional funding from central Gov. to support co-collection of home business waste with household services. The threshold should logically be set at a point that the provision/commission of separate collection service or containers for a top up subscription (like council garden waste bins) is economically viable/practicable. Larger waste producers that then abuse the system are more likely be spotted by collection staff and council enforcement officers and fit better with the current fine structure. The above policy may also divert material currently going into the on street bins and the household waste and recycling centre away to home bins, where small home business that fall within a threshold may currently deposit their material into the on street bins rather than their home bins to avoid a more noticeable volumes in their home containers. Freeing up capacity for essential users of these services and reducing vehicle trips and pollution.
_______________________________________________________________
Issues for consideration in context with the above:
The proportion of the working population working from home including engaging in enterprises that create waste is currently increasing
Economist warn that within the next 20 years we will on average be engaged in some form of ‘work’ between our late 70s and early 80s as an economic necessity for many wishing to enjoy the same standard of living as our parents and increasingly as a life choice by others (with significant potential wellbeing advantages in terms of in terms of increasing happiness, physical and mental health and reducing loneliness) – logic suggests that many will chose to transition to carriers/work based at home allowing for comfort/work life balance benefits.
Transitioning from a linear (throw away) economy and a curricular (resource efficient) economy offers the potential for home based enterprise, with particular areas of opportunity within:
The servicing, repair, and refurbishment of goods more increasingly designed to require/facilitate these actions as part of ‘designed to last’ design culture/requirement seeing goods made to extend their life as longs as possible
Increased leasing and supply of ‘need’ services/contracts as we move away from ownership of goods e.g. today a need a car, a lawnmower, a hedge trimmer – the management, maintenance and supply (including the skills to use these goods if required) could be in many cases embedded on part of not fully with a network of home businesses
Increased use of local resources (including synergistic use of by-products from other local etherises) to create goods
Logic suggests that compared to these small businesses caught out/up as part of the council’s attempts to address larger scale abuse of communal waste/recycling bins by larger businesses, there will be many more home businesses placing waste in communal council bins and more so in individual property bins that are not identified. Adding to the load and cost of these services, without making a direct contribution to the cost of running these services intended for household waste and paid for largely via council tax. Having experience managing such services, trying to prevent use of council services for such waste, identify where this happens and enforce infringements would be fairly futile and not cost efficient (or popular for Cllrs wanting to be voted back in).
It should also be considered that the most cost and resource efficient method to manage this waste stream is to co-collect it with the household waste, compared to sending/engaging a separate collection service. Even if making direct charges for small volumes of home business waste was bought into by users it may not be cost effective to operate. Taking top-up payments directly from home business using a co-collection service is likely to be problematic/costly in terms of identifying who needs to pay and effectively collecting these payment and enforcing non-compliance. There is also perhaps argument to take that people employed by home business and the business activities represent economic activity and growth that create benefits for local and central governmental finances across multiple departmental budge areas e.g.: reduced unemployment and related support payments, improved wellbeing reducing costs to health and social services, economic growth leading to increased tax contributions.
___
(I am dyslexic so apologies for any text oddities)