Anti-Social Behaviour
Piloting 'On the spot penalties' for disorder
This is a summary of the pilot scheme introduced by the Criminal Justice system and Police Act 2001 to issue penalty notices or 'on the spot penalties' for punishing low-level disorder offences such as 'causing harassment, alarm or distress' and 'disorderly behaviour while drunk'. It is considered one way of dealing speedily with anti-social offending and reducing the workloads of both the police and courts.
Title: Piloting 'On the spot penalties' for disorder
Author: Gavin Halligan-Davis and Keith Spicer
Date published: September
Number of pages: 6
The pilots ran for a 12-month period from August 2002 and took place in 4 police force areas. These covered 11 disorder offences, for those aged 18 or over.
The purpose of PNDs (penalty notices for disorder) often referred to as 'on the spot fines', was a way of accelerating action on the more serious cases by diverting less serious cases from the court system.
The pilot areas were:
West Midlands (including the British Transport Police) – piloted force-wide
Essex – piloted force-wide
Metropolitan Police – piloted in Croydon
North Wales – piloted in the Central division, later force-wide from April 2003.
Offences for which a PND could be issued
There were 2 tariffs of £40 and £80 according to the offense.
Those offenses attracting a £80 penalty included:
knowingly giving a false alarm to a fire brigade
wasting police time or giving a false report
using a public telecommunications system for sending a message known to be false in order to cause annoyance
causing harassment, alarm or distress (section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 was added by order in 2002).
Offences attracting a £40 penalty included:
being drunk in a highway, other public place or licensed premises
throwing fireworks in a main road or highway
trespassing on a railway
throwing stones etc. at trains or other things on railways
buying or attempting to buy alcohol for consumption in licensed premises by a person under 18
disorderly behaviour while drunk in a public place
consumption of alcohol in a 'no alcohol' designated public place.
Operational guidance for police officers during the pilot
It was at the officer's discretion whether to issue a PND or whether to charge or caution the offender. The officer however, took the following factors into consideration:
there should have been sufficient evidence to bring a charge
the offence was not too serious
the suspect was suitable, compliant and able to understand what was going on
no other more serious or non-penalty offences were known to have taken place
the suspect was not below 18 years of age
there was sufficient evidence as to the suspect's age, identity and place of residence in Great Britain.
PND process
once a penalty notice has been issued, the recipient has 21 days in which to pay or request a court hearing
failure to do either should have resulted in the registration of a fine of the original amount plus 50%
payment involved no admission of guilt and the recipient avoided conviction and a criminal record
if further evidence emerged as to the seriousness of the offence, or the recipient's full criminal history became known, formal proceedings could be initiated once the 21-day payment period had expired.
Results of the pilot
6,043 penalty notices for disorder (PNDs) were issued in the 4 pilot areas. 90% were issued for just two offences: 2,951 (49%) for 'causing harassment, alarm or distress', and 2,530 (42%) for 'disorderly behaviour while drunk'.
51% of PNDs issued by the end of the project were paid within the statutory period of 21 days. If not paid within the 21 days, a fine is registered. Fines were registered for 46% of PNDs and at least 39% of this group finally paid, making an overall payment rate of nearly 70%.
Evidence from 2 pilot areas suggested that between a quarter and a half of PNDs went to offenders who would otherwise have been cautioned or prosecuted. This suggests that there were many new cases, which received PNDs.
Men received 86% of all PNDs issued. Only 12% of PNDs were issued to 18- to 20-year-olds. About a third were issued to 21- to 24-year-olds, about a third to 25- to 34- year-olds and just over a quarter to those aged 35 or more.
Issuing PNDs was less time-consuming than current procedures, with an estimated saving of between 1.5 and 2.5 police hours compared with a caution or prosecution. Fewer than 2% of recipients requested a court hearing.
Police officers in the pilot areas favored extending the range of (minor) offences for which PNDs might be used.
While officers saw deterrent value in increasing the size of the penalties and using them for juveniles, they also expressed concerns about doing so. Given that default rates were slightly worse for £80 than £40 penalties, raising the amount could increase default rates. Others felt that if parents, rather than the juveniles, take on responsibility for payment, the juvenile is essentially 'let off'.
How was the pilot programme received?
Satisfaction with PNDs
An evaluation was carried out to find out what police officers thought about the pilot scheme. Feedback was received from 100 questionnaires and 40 interviews were conducted with police officers. The findings were:
the level of satisfaction with PNDs among those responsible for operating them was very high. One person said:
"I cannot think of any other change in working practice which has reduced the workload of officers and still been effective." (Essex police force)
A small number thought it was a 'soft option' and not a significant deterrent.
Last update: 11 October 2004