Skip hire man who ran an illegal, rat infested waste site in March must pay £47,000 court rules

Skip operator Israr Ahmed's waste: his operations have cost him £47,000 and a suspended prison sente

Skip operator Israr Ahmed's waste: his operations have cost him £47,000 and a suspended prison sentence - Credit: Archant

A skip operator who ran a rat infested waste site in March was today given a nine month suspended sentence and handed a confiscation and costs order for £47,000.

Israr Ahmed was arrested after he failed to take advice from the Environment Agency and ran his business illegally, Peterborough Crown Court heard today (Fri).

He had been operating Dial a Skip for more than a year, undercutting competitors.

Ahmed, who pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to running an illegal waste site and failing to produce waste transfer notes, was sentenced to 32 weeks in prison suspended for 18 months for running the site. He was also ordered to do 200 hours unpaid work in the community.

A £30,000 confiscation order was made against him with a nine month prison sentence in default and he was ordered to pay £17,000 full costs and £100 victim surcharge. No separate penalty was made for the other two charges.


You may also want to watch:


The court heard he rented a unit at Gaul Farm Industrial Estate in March and dumped waste there and in another unit on the same site, rented by his wife, as well as several outside areas around the site.

The waste on the site rotted and became rat-infested causing concerns to people living nearby.

Most Read

Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting, said Ahmed knew he needed a permit to operate the site as a waste dump or sorting station and had been advised by environment officers.

“He was being paid to take waste and was depositing and treating it illegally on the site,” she said.

She said Ahmed would have had to make major changes to the site before a permit could have been granted so had saved money by not doing that. He would also have had to consider health and safety and the potential impact on the environment.

Environment Agency surveillance caught Ahmed supervising waste being tipped at the back of the site and then sorting it, actions he later tried to deny.

He was twice served a notice to produce waste transfer notes but failed to do so and later withdrew a waste permit application he had submitted.

Mrs McDonald told the court that Ahmed had advertised his business on eBay even though he had told an environment officer that he would not be selling it. In it he claimed to run 25 skips a week.

Mr Andrew Thomas QC told the court Ahmed was naive and did not completely ignore the advice of the Environment Agency.

Judge Sean Enright said the waste site was an eyesore and a health hazard resulting in large rats. He said Ahmed misled the Environment Agency even in a taped interview.

Ahmed was undercutting his competitors and the offence was committed for financial gain.

He said the custody threshold had been crossed but custody could be suspended because he had been naive.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Emma Viner said: “Whilst seeming to be co-operative Ahmed repeatedly lied to us including in the interview under caution.

“When a business operates without a permit, it is able to undercut its permitted competitors and can result in more people operating illegally to compete.

“Waste crime puts people and the environment at risk and we are taking tough action to deal with criminal behaviour.”

Ahmed pleaded guilty to:

1. Between 1 January 2011 and 27 April 2012 at Gaul Farm Industrial Estate, Gaul Road, March, Cambridgeshire PE15 0YY you did operate a regulated facility, namely a waste operation for the deposit, storage and treatment of waste, without being authorised by an environmental permit granted under Regulation 13 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010

Contrary to Regulation 12(1) (a) and 38(1) (a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010

2. You failed by 7 April 2012 or at all, to comply with the requirement in a notice dated 29 March 2012 and served on you pursuant to Section 34(5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and Regulation 35(6) of the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 to produce copies of waste transfer notes to an Environment Agency officer.

Contrary to Section 34(5) and (6) Environmental Protection Act 1990

No separate penalty

3. You failed by 30 May 2012 or at all, to comply with the requirement in a notice dated 22 May 2012 and served on you pursuant to Section 34(5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and Regulation 35(6) of the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 to produce copies of waste transfer notes to an Environment Agency officer.

Contrary to Section 34(5) and (6) Environmental Protection Act 1990

No separate penalty

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter