Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Suspended sentence for burning waste

26th April 2012, Page 15
26th April 2012
Page 15
Page 15, 26th April 2012 — Suspended sentence for burning waste
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

A WARWICKSHIRE skip haulier has been handed a six-month prison sentence suspended for 12 months and ordered to complete 80 hours’ unpaid work for burning waste.

In an Environment Agency prosecution (EA), Nuneaton Magistrates’ Court was told how in November 2010 officers from the organisation visited Walnut Hill Farm in Ullenhall near Henley-inArden, where William Turner, 64, was based, following a complaint about burning.

It was found that a large amount of treated wood and chipboard was being burnt at the farm. A skip was also seen nearby contain ing burnt metal. In March 2011, EA officers noticed a skip wagon leaving the defendant’s waste transfer company in Birmingham. The wagon, which was later seen entering Walnut Hill Farm, had a container on the back that contained waste items, including wood.

An EA officer observed the skip wagon discharging wood and cardboard waste from its container, and then a fire being lit by an unidentified male.

Shortly afterwards, the defendant was seen approaching the fire and pouring some form of accelerant onto it.

Turner was also ordered to pay prosecution costs of £12,663.13 after pleading guilty at an earlier hearing to one charge of illegally burning waste under Regulation 38(1)(a) and Regulation 12(1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting Regulations.

EA spokesman David Hudson says: “We tried to work with Mr Turner at his Birmingham waste site, and when we found him burning waste on his farm we explained to him that he could not burn waste there.

“However, even then he continued to burn the waste.

“Because we use covert surveillance as one of our investigation tools, we had very clear evidence to present to the court.”

Dealt with firmly

This was a case that involved repeated and flagrant disregard for the law and damage to the environment. The court acted to show that people who engage in such activities are likely to be caught and dealt with firmly.

comments powered by Disqus