Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Peterborough ET site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Unlicensed security guards fined by court



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 August 2008
TWO security guards have been fined after they were caught working at Peterborough City Council premises without licences.
Gary Privett and Nigel Barks were allowed to keep watch over the council's street cleaning depot in Nursery Lane, Fengate, even though they had not undergone the necessary criminal record and identity vetting by the authorities.

Although the men h
ad earlier been warned they faced prosecution if they worked without a licence, they were still employed by now-defunct security firm and council contractor Central Security East Anglia.

Following an investigation by the Security Industry Authority (SIA), the pair admitted the offences at Peterborough Magistrates' Court and were ordered to pay fines and costs totalling £780.

Security licensing was introduced in April 2006 and requires anyone working as a nightwatchman, bouncer or cash delivery driver to go through identity checks, criminal background searches and training beforehand.

Nina Best, prosecuting for the SIA, said: "The legislation was brought in to address serious problems in the security industry and ensure standards could be raised and enforced rigidly.

"All individuals are required to go through the SIA vetting process and receive a security licence before they can engage in any licensable activities."

The court was told that Privett (54) worked 10 unlicensed shifts at the council depot over three weeks in January, and Barks (59) worked illegally for a single shift during the same month.

Privett, of Northborough Road, Milking Nook, near Peterborough, was in the process of applying for an SIA licence at the time but Barks, of Whitwell in Paston, Peterborough, could not afford the £245 fee.

The pair, who had no previous criminal convictions, told magistrates their employers had cleared them to work, but they nevertheless pleaded guilty to working while unlicensed.

Privett, who now has an SIA licence, was fined £200 and ordered to pay £400 costs.

Barks, who is unemployed, was fined £50 plus costs of £100.

The two men must also each pay a victim surcharge of £15.

Peterborough City Council's head of operations for city services David Denson said the authority had no knowledge the men were illegally employed when they started work.

He said: "When Central Security East Anglia was contracted to carry out security duties, it was legally required to provide licensed personnel.

"As soon as it came to our attention that these men were not licensed, they were no longer allowed to work at the city council.

"We invited the SIA on to council premises to investigate thoroughly and have continued to work with the SIA to bring them to justice."

The security firm itself is now under new management and has been relaunched under the shortened name Central Security.

Managing director Simon Lamb said: "These two men no longer work for the company and we will not employ non-licensed staff. Everything is done properly now."



The full article contains 478 words and appears in Peterborough ET newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 08 August 2008 8:29 AM
  • Source: Peterborough ET
  • Location: Peterborough
 
Prev
1
Next
1

captainsawdust,

08/08/2008 16:03:18
An Ex cid officer owned that company !! oh dear
2

KiwiinPboro,

08/08/2008 17:57:59
Kill someone in a car and get fine 400 pounds. Have no security licence get fines of 780 pounds. Shame on this country for the stupid lack of clarity in sentences.
3

A Seymour,

08/08/2008 19:39:35
These fines are stupid. How will they help anything? The guys were not involved with the public they didnt handle cash and they didnt steal anything they were just trying to earn a living yet didnt have the right piece of paper so were fined. SIA needs to get its own house in order I know of people trying to renew their license and having to wait 6 months for it therefore being unable to work until it arrived.
4

Blizzard,

08/08/2008 20:22:33
seymour take a tablet. ask yourself why these two failed to comply in the first place, anything to hide perhaps ? consider also those hard working folk who did comply forking out £245. feel the same now ?
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.