AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Suspended sentences for waste hauliers

6th February 2014
Page 7
Page 7, 6th February 2014 — Suspended sentences for waste hauliers
Close
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?

By Roger Brown

BOSSES AT waste haulage company Leeds Paper Recycling have been handed suspended prison sentences after they were discovered storing thousands of bales of waste at two sites without the required environmental permits.

In an Environment Agency (EA) prosecution, Leeds Crown Court was told how in January 2012 officers discovered that brothers Jamie Michael Todd, 33, and Thomas Todd, 24, had been storing waste at the Knostrop Depot industrial park in Hunslet.

The waste pile grew from 209 bales in January to an estimated 11,500 bales by May, along with thousands of flies and a strong smell.

Canal and River Trust, the landowner of the Knostrop park, subsequently spent £1.4m cleaning up the site, paying for pest control and removing 755 loads of waste.

Leeds Paper Recycling had also stored approximately 4,000 bales of waste illegally at Goole Docks, containing paper, plastic, carpet, metal, wood and drink bottles containing liquid, as well as general waste.

In April 2013 Leeds Paper Recycling changed its name to Whitecase, but the firm was liquidated soon afterwards.

Jamie Todd was given a six-month prison term, suspended for 18 months, and ordered to carry out 180 hours of unpaid work. Thomas Todd was handed a

four-and-a-half-month sentence, suspended for 18 months, as well as an order to carry out 140 hours of unpaid work.

They each admitted nine waste management offences.

Thomas Todd also admitted to an offence under the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 2007 that related to the illegal shipment of three containers of waste to China, which were intercepted at Felixstowe.

In mitigation, the Todds said that they had committed the offences after relying on professional advice, provided by an independent environmental consultant, that had turned out to be wrong.

In addition, Thomas Todd said he had limited responsibility for the running of the firm.


comments powered by Disqus