Leicester dog owner wins seven-month battle against council as £80 fine scrapped
A dog walker has won a seven-month battle against the city council after being wrongly fined for walking his pet on a public footpath.
Kev Edmondston was walking spaniel Tilly along the path cutting through Gilroes Cemetery when he was stopped by two wardens.
-
Kev Edmondston, from Leicester, spent months fighting a Leicester City Council fine
Despite his pleas, they insisted Mr Edmondston was walking in a dog exclusion zone, and gave him an £80 fixed penalty notice.
Now, after seven months of fighting the fine – and a court appearance – Leicester City Council bosses have admitted they were wrong and have cancelled the penalty.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Sunday, May 26 2013
Mr Edmondston, 54, who lives off Groby Road, Leicester, said: "I'm absolutely elated with the outcome and feel totally vindicated. I knew it was wrong all along.
"It really was quite a stressful thing to have gone through.
"I feel very angry. I feel angry that the council were so unwilling to listen – when I spoke to them, it was a case of go to court or pay the fine, nothing else."
Mr Edmondston was walking from Gorse Hill City Farm, in Anstey Lane, along a fenced-off public footpath which runs through the cemetery to Anstey.
The cemetery is a dog exclusion zone, but the footpath is not.
After being given the fine in March, he presented the council with photographs showing dog exclusion signs on gates to the cemetery, but none on the footpath.
He said he also sent the council documents which showed a public footpath can not be turned into a dog exclusion zone.
"I was told the chief warden had looked at my case, but that I was wrong," he said.
"I was then told the head of street scene enforcement had also looked at it, but I was still wrong."
Mr Edmondston was summoned to Leicester Magistrates' Court on October 5. He pleaded not guilty.
"It wasn't a nice experience," he said. "I have never been in trouble before."
The hearing was then adjourned for four weeks.
On Friday, moments before Mr Edmondston and his wife Sandra were due to go into court for a second hearing, the council's solicitor revealed Mr Edmondston had been right all long.
"She was so apologetic and said she had had a phone call from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), who said the council was wrong, I was right, and that lots of councils all over the place have been giving out these fines wrongly.
"I'm so relieved it is all over."
A Leicester City Council spokesman apologised for the authority's handling of the case and the inconvenience caused to Mr Edmondston.
He said: "This case revolves around a legal issue of whether or not a public right of way overrides the requirements of a dog exclusion order.
"Therefore, at the initial hearing in October, our solicitor called for an adjournment to seek further advice from Defra and, on the basis of that, the prosecution action was discontinued."
The spokesman said another fine would now be reimbursed as a result of the case.
Comments
by Jackwills97
Sunday, November 11 2012, 11:15AM
“Well done to one ,an and his dog for winning the court case isn't that dog just adorable :)”
by PLYMFOX01
Sunday, November 11 2012, 8:46AM
“The council will never admit they are wrong. This isnt just Leicester City Council its any of them.
As for the dog in the photo, Spaniels are beautiful animals. We had a Blue Roan Cocker Spaniel until fairly recently, she lived until she was 12. They are so loving and loyal.”
by Bomberbabe
Sunday, November 11 2012, 1:22AM
“Err , isn't this area in the portfolio of Assistant Mayor Sarah Russell ? And isn't she putting herself forward for PCC ......a bit worrying that this matter got out of hand , suggests she and the law are not good together !!!!”
by unbiased
Friday, November 09 2012, 5:46PM
“these wardens are out of control, then they wonder why people get aggressive towards them. Maybe it would be prudent to ensure that these so called wardens are trained in basic BRITISH highway law etc. This sort of fiasco is becoming all to regular these days!”
by bikeresteban
Friday, November 09 2012, 2:15PM
“It's a sad fact that nobody ever listens to anybody nowadays. Well done chap for you dogged determination to get justice.”
by Careers Partnership (UK) Ltd
Friday, November 09 2012, 11:19AM
“I find it worrying the Council staff management concerned did not consult their in-house legal team when challenged about the legality of their action. A simple email to the legal team (attaching copies of Kev Edmondston's documentation) could have stopped this sorry saga in its tracks.
The Council - like any other organisation or individual - needs to keep in mind always that it may make mistakes and the opposing party may have right on their side. I hope the Chief Executive has now written an apology to Kev Edmondston and his wife for the Council's unreasonable behaviour and its slowness in admitting its mistake.”
by MacMonkey74
Friday, November 09 2012, 9:54AM
“@Tillysdad
My comments weren't seeking to defend the council employees involved in this debacle but were rather in response to those who spend all day on here bad mouthing every single aspect of everything the council does.
The comment on this thread that uses your case as an example of why the council isn't fit for purpose is an example of the hysterical attitude that irks me.
It certainly shows that their knowledge of the legislation surrounding the law they claim you broke is severely flawed and for that reason they deserve criticism. My point would be that all organisations make stupid mistakes like this and if we had a conservative council things like this would still happen on occasion.
This shouldn't be political it should be a story about a resourceful man taking on his local council over an error they made resulting in a well done to you and either disciplinary action or re-training for those involved in those decisions.
Sorry if it came across another way. It's folk like you that remind all councils to keep on their toes and I would have no problem with them compensating you in some way for your trouble.”
by heisspartacus
Thursday, November 08 2012, 11:59PM
“Rajjan, why don't you get a sense of proportionality.”
by Rajjan
Thursday, November 08 2012, 10:08PM
“I hope city council will sacked some of the staff who are responsible for this mistake . If not then SPS need to go.”
by Tillysdad
Wednesday, November 07 2012, 10:00PM
“Dear MacMonkey74
Thanks for your comment but i think you have missed a point that may not have come across, as the person involved i did my utmost to stop this from the start, the Wardens stopped me on the Saturday morning and wouldn't listen to my reasoning with them then, when the council offices opened on the Monday morning i handed over my case for why they had a made a mistake by hand delivery and also spoke to the chief warden over the phone. The chief Warden and subsequently her boss the "Head of street scene enforcement" both stated they had investigated the matter as had the legal team. I fought this over a 7 month perod as a general member of the public and while i accept what you say about anyone can make mistakes the council had ample opportunity to rectify this.”