to the cheeky people on here suggesting i teach my Son to use tissues or a good idea to make sure he carries some etc etc i forgot to mention : were not simpletons , he did have some but ran out and he also knows how to use a tissue. i dont know why someone would say things like that...maybe because they think im stupid or because they are pompous enough to think that he wouldnt do such a normal simple thing as carry tissues when you have a cold. .either way youre all wrong in more way than one - and it wasnt the subject so dont go out your way trying to offer obvious advice that the person has already naturally done. to the others that have given advice on the legal side: cheers, much appreciated and it has been taken on board. to the others who gave no advice, were of no help, only hindered someone in a time of need and gave only their opinions that was irrelevant to the topic - go and mess yourselves. Im off of this site, its too much hard work !

yeah thats a saying...but ..well a factual direct answer (one i can verify on .gov or whatever etc etc etc) to one of the questions i asked would be nice.

thanks man in the middle and ftm dave - yes that was what i was thinking of explaining: an emergency medical condition which was unavoidable by a disabled child,.. which of course what it was...he doesnt go around spitting when he hasent got a cold. what if he had a coughing fit like he did the other day and was sick on the platform...a medical accident which cannot be helped, why would a officer fine him for littering as it cannot be 'picked' up , the same as spit...(maybe scooped up if someone provided some sort of device for scooping and appropriately disposed..hence it still wouldn't be classed as litter as its not 'picked' up?) I will explain to the council that the 'officer' was over zealous.

when youve got a cold and cough up phlegm and theres no toilet on the platform where are you meant to put it genius?....and not really a comparison saying i wouldnt have it on my living room floor as obviously i would spit it down the toilet...also theres no point in NOT reading my post properly and coming out with stupid comments like "the poor staff etc" when i said he spat it at the side of the platform onto the tracks...do the staff clean the tracks? no! i just want facts about my concerns as posted above that would help...not condescending remarks that dont help! ie: point me to a law that says section xxxx of law xxx says its littering. ............ thanks bankfodder - ive always thought of littering as dropping litter. and spitting is spitting. and urinating is urinating. ive never been confused by getting them mixed up. yes i agree he probably is a jobsworth ....all i want is some forewarned facts that if he can twist common sense and say that spitting is littering i can come back to the council and say no as in sectionxxxxof such law says its not. im not saying spitting is nice..but as i said hes disabled and had a serious cold for over 3 weeks...the other day he was coughing so bad that it irritated his throat and he threw up instantly....when your out in public theres not much you can do about it....i mean you dont get to choose when your going to have a coughing fit or when to sneeze etc...if we did get to choose then we'd be living in a perfect world..but thats not the case... the only thing ive found so far is : Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2006), which states: ‘Litter is best defined as something which is improperly discarded by members of the public in an area. It includes sweet wrappers, drinks containers, cigarette ends, gum, apple cores, fast food packaging, till receipts, small bags. That doesnt include spitting and as my DISABLED son done his best in discarding it PROPERLY by spitting it down the side of the platform where no one will tread on it....i think that will be my reply to the council.

Hello, I need some advice - my registered disabled Son was at a train station (i thought this was not a public place once through the gates? ie: tresspass on railway etc) he had a bad cold and was coughing. He needed to spit out the phlegm went to the side of the platform and spat it out so no one would step in it. Then a local 'authorised officer' from the council went up to him and told him he was from 'the environmental health' and was now going to be fined for littering and demanded his name, address and age - my Son said he didnt understand but gave his name and address through fear. The man asked his age and when he told him he was 17 the man said "oh your parents will be informed but we cant do anything as your a minor". We've just received a '1st reminder' letter in my Sons name. We didnt get the initial letter and it says he may have to pay up to £2,500 for littering for an offence under the environmental health act 1990. There's no phone number that I can ring and the only way of communicating is a chat thing on the website address that I got off the letter. I put that he's a minor and didn't litter and that he's registered as disabled. I also said the officer told my son he is from the environmental health which we believe is not true so can I have his name to verify that he was from environmental health or just an 'authorised officer' from the council and who ever he is hasn't got recordings of him littering, waiting to hear what they say. I've done a quick bit of research and cant find if spitting is a breach of the environmental health act 1990 my concerns are : 1. can he approach him in a non-public place (if the station isn't public) as the environmental health act says about incidents in the public. 2. is spitting an offence ? 3. can they take a child to court for littering if he spits? thanks

i basically just copied the time of timeline events of hers that were incorrect and pasted them and explianed why they was incorrect. the rest was what you put for the defence - thank you bankfodder

i submitted it. i selected mediation aswell - so hopefully it will go mediation and i'll offer the £300 as before.

if you understood 'where i was'...why did you keep asking 'where is was'? ..anyway you have now changed it to 4 different questions to which i will answer. What I want to know is where were you in the minutes before the incident = walking in the trees and bushes between the bridle path and footpath in the opposite field to the mothers property. the road separates the mothers property and the field opposite with the trees and bushes between the footpath and bridle path. Where were the dogs? = in front of me in the bushes and the trees between the footpath and bridle path in the field opposite the mothers property. Did the cat appear in front of you? = it must of, but i did not see it because of the bushes and trees and the dogs were in front of me so obviously the dogs saw it before me and as they are lower to the ground than me they had the advantage of seeing it before i did. Did you only become aware of the cat after the dogs when after it? = yes

you keep asking where i was. you asked me that on thread #120 and i have answered/explained that in thread #121 : "the cat ran down that row of bushes/tress and the dogs chasd it (green arrow indicating direction). i was running behind but obviously cant keep up with the dogs and trying to get through the bushes trees is why i didnt arrive at the same time as them by the road which is marked in a red circle where it happened. "

thanks bankfoder, ive just been going through the documents she sent me and have found the pedigree of the cat which says the claimant is the owner...so would this need to be removed: Paragraph 3.2.1 of the claim – it is not clear that the claimant is the owner of the cat. i also believe the verge that i estimate to be 10 to 20metres wide maybe property belonging to someone else which is why the claimants mothers boundary fence is not next to the road...so if she does claim it is her property should she need to prove this?? also on the gate to the mothers property she has a sign saying "cctv surveilance" - so if my dogs where actually on her property she would have a recording of this? why hasnt she sent me the recording as evidence? another thing that shes saying is wrong is that immediatley behind her boundary fence is a pond (directly in the direction of where the mother and boyfriend appeared from)..so if my dogs went onto her property they would have have to go through the pond...but they didnt and the claimants photos show my dogs were not wet...would this be benificial to my case? i have attached a picture of the dilapidated fence ...it shows below the green line is the verge or possibly someone elses land. above the green line is her boundary with the dilapidated fence where you can see its fell down and continues to be on the ground to the right. the red arrow shows the pond immediately behind her boundary. and on the other side of the pond above the purple line shows a fence that she has to keep her horses in the field....would this be benificial to show that she has made no effort to keep her cats in and also shows that if my dogs did pass the boundary fence they would have to go into her pond? i think the following needs to be changed: Paragraph 3.3.2 of the claim – this is not correct and the claimant has no evidence that this is correct. The defendants dogs were not on the private property. It seems that the cat had escaped/left to roam the countryside from the property belonging to the claimant's mother by means of a dilapidated boundary fence and then through dense undergrowth and was now approx 800 metres from the claimants property and now in a hedge line between a public footpath and a bridle path Paragraph 3.3.2 of the claim – this is not correct and the claimant has no evidence that this is correct. The defendants dogs were not on the private property. It seems that the cat had escaped from the property belonging to the claimant's mother by means of a dilapidated boundary fence and then through dense undergrowth and was now in an open field. I believe that the dilapidated boundary fence belonged to the property from which the cat had escaped. My dogs were not out of control. They were walking with me but then reacted in the way one might normally expect from dogs when a cat suddenly appears in front of them. it was the dogs instinct to chase. paragraph 3.5.4 of the claim -once again, I did not see the confrontation. I only heard it. However I repeat that the confrontation did not occur on private land as alleged. It occurred in a hedge line approx 800m from the property after the cat had escaped the private property through a dilapidated boundary fence. It is believed that the dilapidated boundary fence belonged to the property from which the cat escaped also ive just remembered i have no witnesses but when the boyfriend was detaining me at the gate (where i tied my dogs) 3 people where coming down the lane and the mother went off to talk to them and she came back and said "be quiet now as these people have autism" which me and the boyfriend said ok then as they passed and walked off she smugly smiled and said in a sarcastic way "they are my witnesses"...would this be of any use?

thanks i will read it tomorrow. i was on my own - no one was with me. when you say "Why it was in the garden at all" the cat was not in a garden.....the cat was at the mothers 'business' property which is the field circled in blue.....the claimants residential address is about 2 miles from where the cat is kept in a barn in the field which is the mothers property. other neighbours have said the cats sleep in the barn...so basically its not a normal pet that is kept at home. she has other cats that roam the fields and roads...other neighbours are always saying they have to swerve her cats when they are in the road, she obviously has cats around to keep the mice population down..they are not pets in the traditional sense.

thanks bankfodder - you worded it brilliantly - better than i can do. the parts i would change (in blue) are : paragraph 3.5.4 – once again, I did not have the confrontation. I only heard it. However I repeat that the confrontation did not occur on private land as alleged. It occurred on a verge beside the road after the cat had escaped the private property to a dilapidated fence. It is believed that the dilapidated fence belonged to the property from which the cat escaped i have attached a map of the scene to show where i was (map.pdf) ...i was walking the dogs at the green cross, the dogs spotted the cat roughly at that point. the cat ran down that row of bushes/tress and the dogs chasd it (green arrow indicating direction). i was running behind but obviously cant keep up with the dogs and trying to get through the bushes trees is why i didnt arrive at the same time as them by the road which is marked in a red circle where it happened. the dogs couldnt have got through the dense undergrowth between the road and the claimants property and then back out onto the road again where i met them. the claimants mothers property is circled in blue. i have also attached a photo of how dense the verge is next to the road but before their property (verge.pdf)...it is not the section with the dilapidated fence. i do have a photo of the section by the area circled in red that shows the fence on the ground. i cant find it now but will upload tomorrow. when i was aware of what happend i called my dogs and they came to me. i then tied them (leashed) to a neighbouring propertys gate. map.pdf verge.pdf

how have you got the claimants details? i thought i had to leave any information like that out as not to expose any persons name or addresses etc for data protection etc? also they could be on these forums and see everything that im doing about it?

thanks bankfodder, when you say "I don't know where there is a pet with a different name either – but in one of the paragraphs, your redaction has made things so unclear that we don't understand." i dont understand that? what is unclear? ive only referred to one cat! you say " You have redacted many things that weren't necessary." what have i redacted? i wasnt aware i did? also how have you got all the claimants details? as i didnt mention anyones names but you have put their names above? you say "I have cleared the redactions on your claim form. I have separated the paragraphs" - i have not got a clue what this is or what you mean???? ive came here for help and your just bombarding me with stuff i have no idea about but you seem to expect me to know what it all means. sorry if that sounds ungrateful - its not - its just i do not understand it all.

why is that obscure?