How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • Go back-and-forth until satisfied
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Stuart J Your Own Question
Stuart J
Stuart J, Solicitor
Category: European Law
Satisfied Customers: 22838
Experience:  Senior Partner at Berkson Wallace
11292137
Type Your European Law Question Here...
Stuart J is online now

If I am a visitor of three local ponds, one of the Council

This answer was rated:

If I am a visitor of three local ponds, one of the Council inside a Local Nature reserve and two private but open to visitors and see people fishing illegally, poaching and killing the water birds what can I do?

We have already covered this on the other thread. If you are simply a bystander looking on and appalled by what is happening, then unless it’s your land, there is nothing that you can do. You don’t have the locus.

The people that own the land may not be bothered about this and if that’s the case, it is not illegal.

In respect of the killing of the waterbirds, then refer it to RSPB who have a statutory ability to deal with it.

Customer: replied 11 days ago.
No 1.
RSPB refused to get involved. They are too busy
Customer: replied 11 days ago.
No2. Do I need a locus for the public pond?

This locus means “locus standi” ((Latin- standing in the place). It means you have to have the right to bring the claim which you don’t have.

RSPB: I share your frustration although my only dealings have not been with RSPB but with RSPCA who were to be frank, a waste of time. It seems that they don’t do much if they are not on the television!

In respect of the public pond, you cannot simply walk past and see something happening which you don’t agree with and then take court proceedings to stop it.

 

Let’s exaggerate to prove the point.

 

I am walking down the road and I see a guy building a wall for which he has no planning permission. I can report it to the local authority but of the local authority don’t want to be bothered are not bothered, I cannot take legal proceedings against him to stop it because I have no “locus”. It is nothing to do with me, I am just an innocent bystander.

Stuart J and other European Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 11 days ago.
If one of those acting illegally harassed me and I can prove it?
Customer: replied 3 days ago.
Could you please answer this?

That is a completely separate issue.

If you decide to challenge these people doing whatever it is they are doing and then they start to harass you as a result, to try to carry on doing what they are doing, it depends the extent of what they are doing.

Harassment is defined as a course of action (more than once) which is intended to harass, does harass, is reckless as to whether it harasses, or if the average bystander would look at the conduct and think that it was indeed harassment.

Harassment is both a civil matter and a criminal matter.

If you are being harassed. Go to the police and ask them to warn the ex-under the Protection from Harassment Act. Some police forces take that very seriously and others not so and therefore, you may need to speak to a senior officer or put a complaint in writing to the Chief Constable.

You would need to know the name and address of the individual doing the harassment because the police are unlikely to investigate further.

Customer: replied 2 day ago.
The incident was like this exactly:
While witnessing people trespassing and fishing in a non fishing private pond the innocent by stander notified the police.
They asked many questions about the people, how they look like what tools they have etc so the innocent bystander went closer to see better.
Then the fisherment started harassing and called the police to ask that the come and make a trespasser go away.
Please note that the property management company had asked the innocent tresspaser to monitor the activity and let them know.
It took the police three hours to respond during which the harassment was going on and filmed. So there is evidence.
When they finally came the fishermen claimed they had permission to fish from a resident and the police were happy and left him to continue.
They refused to take the report of the innocent harassment for the illegal fishing and to give the details of the fisherman which they have when asked because the innocent bystander wants to take them to civil court.
How about this?

If the property management company has asked the innocent bystander to monitor the activity, then he is no longer an innocent bystander but the agent of the management company but it has to be the management company that makes the application for judicial review or any complaint.

The complaint needs to come from the management company that the individuals do not have the right to fish.

Customer: replied 2 day ago.
We are getting there
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
The innocent bystander was asked by the property manager in writing, in an email beginning of February for the monitoring.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
The "agent" witnessed a taking of a water bird from an identified man in March.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
The property manager called the police to discuss his prosecution and was told:
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
1. That the property management company does not need to get involved. The police know and are dealing with the problem.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
2. To tell the "agent" that they expect no further communication about this.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
Number 1 is wrong isn't it? As it is private property. You also said this

I cannot see on what basis the Property Management doesn’t need to get involved. It’s their land, of course they are involved.

It appears that whilst the police may have known (or not as the case may be) and said they were dealing with the problem, clearly they were not.

I’m not certain what the point is 2

Customer: replied 2 day ago.
Well what is really happening is that the police are trying not to bother with this sort of crimes.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
Both them and the property manager know he needs to get involved.
In order that he is not bothered about it either number two took place after the contact with the police and after the agent's complaint about No1 being wrong and a preaction letter for injuction
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
No3 the property manager and the police cooperated to sue the agent for harassment through emails. Only that they had no evidence to support this allegation.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
The injuction of the property management is asked as separate application in section 8 of the jr.
Where the police is one of the defendants.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
For their decision to neglect and threat that if the agent continues to send emails they will prosecute for wasting police time.
What do you think now?

I think the reality is more like the police don’t want to do anything which involves work. Sorry to be cynical.

 

You haven’t mentioned any suggestion that the agent would be prosecuted for wasting police time. What the agent can’t do is keep banging on because that then is harassment and the agent has to issue legal proceedings or make a complaint or let it drop. Same applies to any complaint to anyone police, private individual, whoever.

Customer: replied 2 day ago.
Correct.
Customer: replied 2 day ago.
Hence the legal proceedings