No legal process for bouncer fines

[Dave]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ssue-fines

By Henry Porter.

No legal process for bouncer fines

Giving bouncers and hospital staff the right to access police records and issue fines opens up the potential for injustice

Sometimes it's difficult not to sound like a car alarm going off at the slightest vibration in the street, as one Cifer unkindly described this blog. But watching the degrading of society's values and traditions with the introduction of misguided laws is very frustrating. It subjects you to feelings of helpless rage when you see poets being turned back at our borders, clowns being banned from performing for children, CCTV in schools and now bouncers being given the power to issue on-the-spot fines.

One of the things that society needs is a clear distinction between authority and the public, a sense that those who are in authority have been trained in the law, are accountable for their behaviour and respect individual rights. Under Labour the lines have been blurred by officious regiment of community support officers, street wardens and accredited persons scheme, which, for example allows, the Norfolk police to give nightclub doormen the power to fine people without any kind of legal process.

Norfolk magistrates were unaware that the police had accredited bouncers in the Prince of Wales Road area of Norwich, which contains many of the city's clubs and pubs, because the police had not consulted either JPs or local judiciary. Suddenly bouncers belonging to a firm called Eventguard were handing out fines without any kind of formal procedure or transparency. Paul Allen, chairman of the local magistrates, suggests that this bypasses the authority of magistrates courts and may result in people being fined unfairly or not receiving the proper punishment.

At Addenbrooke's hospital there are now eight staff who have been "trained" by police and are empowered to issue on-the-spot fines to patients, an astonishing development sanctioned by the chief constable of Cambridgeshire, Julie Spence. Under the Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS) , introduced by the Police Reform Act in 2002, they have the power to demand the name and address of a person and fine them for disorder. In Cambridgeshire, people are concerned about the spread of unaccountable policing and the creation of a "private police force". The police committee expressed worries that "no local democratic or public debate has occurred".

One of the significant powers given to the 1,500 accredited security guards, park wardens and bouncers is access to the Police National Computer, which must surely increase the risk of abuse of the database.

The Magistrates Association has protested to Jack Straw. "Our concern is that here we have essentially a 'third-tier' police force that is now including security guards and door supervisors,"said the deputy chairman of the Magistrates Association, John Howson. "These people need to check the Police National Computer to see if the person has a criminal record. We don't think it appropriate for these people to have that access."

When the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said that on-the-spot fines helped lighten the load of courts, Howson remarked, "The DPP should not be considering what is expedient but what is just."

Quite right. But it's not simply justice that is affected by this shoddy little law. If a bouncer – now dignified with the term "door supervisor" – has the power to behave like a police officer it dilutes the special authority of the police. Neither law nor order is served, and it will be the public that suffers from the lack of clarity and the obvious potential for numerous minor injustices. And like so many labour laws, that will be to the detriment to the tone of society and we will all lose a little.

[ballantyne78]

I think someones jealous. And unable to move on from the "Bouncers" of 20 years ago.

[Dave]

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/

City door staff scheme slammed

Magistrates have hit out at a scheme operating in Norfolk giving private security companies the power to issue on-the-spot fines to troublemakers.

Across England and Wales more than 1,400 people, including 25 employees of Norwich-based EventGuard, are licensed to issue fines for offences from dog fouling to public disorder.

But John Howson, deputy chairman of the 30,000-member Magistrates' Association, told a national newspaper there were already numerous examples of tickets being issued inappropriately.

“Our concern is that here we have essentially a 'third-tier' police force that is now including security guards and door supervisors.

These people need to check the police national computer to see if the person has a criminal record. We don't think it appropriate for these people to have that access.”

His comments echo those expressed last month by Paul Allen, chairman of Norwich magistrates, who said Norfolk police had not consulted magistrates or judges before introducing the powers.

But Mr Allen said some of his fears has been allayed after he met EventGuard managing director Nigel Briggs last week.

“In general terms, what he was saying to me I have no qualms with. It's not about EventGuard and what they do, it's about transparency,” he said.

“The issue is that no-one seems to know about these powers. If you have someone in Riverside urinating in a doorway and you give him a fixed penalty, what's the likelihood of him taking it? He will say 'What authority have you got?'”

Although accredited EventGuard employees do have the authority to award fixed penalty notices, this only applies at events for which they have been contracted to provide security.

Norfolk's chief constable Ian McPeherson has stressed that while the powers exist, he does not want to see them used, and to date they have not been.

Mr Briggs confirmed: “We have not got to that situation. The key aspect is to educate first before any enforcement.

“If somebody is committing an offence of littering, say, we would explain what they have done and what the possible consequences could be.

“We have not issued a single fixed penalty. If people blatantly refuse to comply with a relevant or adequate instruction it could get to that situation.”

He said his staff had no access to the police national computer, and that if they did need to issue a fixed penalty they would have to telephone the police for approval.

“People think I can act like a third-party policeman, but I don't want to. This is just an additional string to our bow to help us deal with issues or incidents.”

[anth609]

hiya all
read today in the paper that ds in norfolk area had been given licence's by the police to issue out fines. Anyone heard anything about this?

Anth

[Nordoff]

I hope not, unless it's a munter tax.

[craneo]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... fines.html

A shambolic idea if you ask me. Whilst you´re writing out your nice pink slip all hell breaks loose inside, what do you do? Or Joe public gets a little annoyed that not only are you throwing him out but your giving him a fine and it al goes pete tong. Lunacy. I suppose the one aspect is that obviously the local authority are recognising that this industry is a professional one and perhaps seeing doorstaff in a different light, but we don´t need flashy licences, uniforms and ticket books, what we need is less red tape and support from the police. Let them do their job and we´ll do ours. (Just my opinion)

[Oneilboy]

Sounds like another case of us having to do the polices work for them, but without all the back up they get.

[ballantyne78]

Read the news section

[glosdoorman-daz]

I can see that it will be city response teams (street safe) who work under a DS licence who would do it rather than doorman based on a door. Either way its a job that the police should do and we she be left alone to do ours

[syko]

it got quite a ripping in the sun too. fergus shanahan who i normally find quite amusing has just set the benchmark for stereotyping our trade with ds being described as "licensed goons" and "gorillas with bulging necks squeezed into black suits, wearing dark glasses"

excuse fooking me but in 10yrs of doorwork i dont think i have ever worn a pair of dark glasses at work ???

shanahan sir, you are an 4rse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[hammer74]

There was a big article in the times on saturday about this. Currently only 1 security firm in norfolk allowed to do this and they have to go through an intense training course & wear a special uniform before they are allowed to issue fines etc

A load of b******S if you ask me

[masstar]

"and they have to go through an intense training course " I can remember reading something like this before licensing came out !!!!! Joke then, Joke now.

"Stay on the pavement"

[spellbound]

GRRRRRRRRRRR, just read the mail on line about this, god it makes me so angry when people refer to us as brainless. I posted a reply but don't think they will publish it, I only said 'Nobhead' once!! >-:< but it might be classed as 'offensive' >:-<

[ballantyne78]

I sent an e-mail to Shanahan regarding his theories in the Sun. Explained that times have changed quite significantly, doorstaff are no longer just hired thugs etc and that we as doorstaff, have not asked for these powers, nor do we particularly want them. I suggested that it was the job of the Police to police the streets, not us. I also suggested that he take a look at WtD for a better insight into what we do.

He had the decency to reply and defend his comments, which he admitted were based on experiences with "bouncers" a number of years ago and not recently. He agreed that it was the job of the Police to monitor the streets and he's of a similar disposition to us regarding PCSO's and their effectiveness, ie they have none.

In all he struck me as a typical man of a certain age who has had no recent experience of doorstaff, good or bad, and as such still believes that nothing has changed in the intervening 20-30 years. I will post up these e-mails if others wish.

[syko]

I sent an e-mail to Shanahan regarding his theories in the Sun. Explained that times have changed quite significantly, doorstaff are no longer just hired thugs etc and that we as doorstaff, have not asked for these powers, nor do we particularly want them. I suggested that it was the job of the Police to police the streets, not us. I also suggested that he take a look at WtD for a better insight into what we do.

He had the decency to reply and defend his comments, which he admitted were based on experiences with "bouncers" a number of years ago and not recently. He agreed that it was the job of the Police to monitor the streets and he's of a similar disposition to us regarding PCSO's and their effectiveness, ie they have none.

In all he struck me as a typical man of a certain age who has had no recent experience of doorstaff, good or bad, and as such still believes that nothing has changed in the intervening 20-30 years. I will post up these e-mails if others wish.

yeah bang em on the page please ol' bean