Body camera trial for Hull's parking officers
Body-worn cameras are being trialled by parking officers in Hull to help deter attacks.Hull City Council said cameras provide an "additional layer of security" for its civil enforcement officers.It is hoped they will help resolve disputes and complaints more efficiently, said bosses.Councillor Mark Ieronimo, portfolio holder for transport and infrastructure, said: "We want our officers to feel safe and supported while they're out doing their jobs, and introducing body cameras is one way we can help make that happen."
He added: "By documenting interactions, these devices are proven to serve as a powerful deterrent against aggressive behaviour, ensuring a safer working environment for our officers. "This trial will provide valuable insights into the benefits and challenges of using this technology in our daily operations."The council did not disclose when the trial, which was launched earlier this month, would end.Listen to highlights from Hull and East Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, watch the latest episode of Look North or tell us about a story you think we should be covering here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Boy to go on trial accused of murdering Harvey Willgoose, 15, at school
A 15-year-old boy who stabbed another teenager at a school is due to go trial accused of murder. Harvey Willgoose, also 15, died after he was stabbed through the heart at All Saints Catholic High School in Sheffield on February 3. A teenager, who cannot be named, has admitted Harvey's manslaughter but denies murdering the Sheffield United fan and will go on trial at Sheffield Crown Court on Monday. The boy, who cannot be named, has also admitted possession of a bladed article. The incident at the school in February shocked Sheffield and the nation. Harvey was remembered as a 'social butterfly' who 'deserved so much more' and 'had dreams, plans and a future ahead of him' at his funeral in February. The service was broadcast on a big screen outside the building for those who could not fit inside, and some mourners wore T-shirts with pictures of Harvey's face and anti-knife crime slogans. His cousin Lana Swirles told the congregation: 'His laughter was contagious and his kindness knew no bounds. 'His adventurous spirit inspired us to enjoy life and seek out joy in the little things.' The service heard how he loved fishing with his grandfather, was 'never far from a scrape' and his mother Caroline recalled that as a little boy his catchphrase was: 'Isn't it a lovely day?' She told mourners: ' One of Harvey's great gifts was his love of people, his kindness to others and his ability to talk to anyone.' Sheffield United was 'the great love of Harvey's life', the service was told, and his coffin was wrapped with a Bramall Lane design. Harvey's parents have been prominent campaigners against knife crime since their son's death and they met Home Secretary Yvette Cooper about the issue in March.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Landlord sparks fury for implementing outrageous $50-a-night charge: 'How is this fair in any way?'
A landlord has sparked outrage after trying to charge her tenant $50 per night for having his girlfriend stay over. British property strategist Jack Rooke read out the shocking email exchange between homeowner Rita and her renter Cameron. Rita had emailed Cameron to inform him of a little-known 'house rule' that imposes additional charges for overnight guests. 'It's been brought to my attention that your girlfriend has stayed overnight on multiple occasions this month. As outlined in the House Rules, overnight guests must be pre-approved and are limited to two nights per calendar month,' Rita's email read. 'Beyond that, a £25 ($A52.50) per night charge applies to cover shared space use and utilities. This will be included in your next invoice.' However, Cameron pointed out that there was nothing in his tenancy agreement about guest charges or pre-approvals - as he slammed Rita for 'running a guest policy like a boutique hotel'. 'Who exactly is keeping tabs on my bedroom?' Cameron replied. The landlord insisted the rules were shared in his 'welcome email' and are 'clearly displayed on the hallway noticeboard'. 'Excessive overnight visits put pressure on the household. I've had complaints. If you want to avoid future charges, please limit stays or register guests in the log book provided,' Rita responded. Furious, Cameron fired back: 'Let me get this straight. You're charging me £25 ($A52.50) per night because my girlfriend stays over a couple of times a week? That's £200 ($A420) a month... for someone sitting on a sofa and using the kettle. 'You've made up some "guest log" system that isn't in the tenancy. There's no approval process in the contract. No mention of fees,' Cameron replied. 'I live here because it's what I can afford. Now you're trying to backdoor in hotel charges? No. I won't be paying.' He added that if the charge appears on his invoice, he will submit a formal complaint. While Rita understood his frustration, she warned him not to 'speak to me like that'. 'These rules are there to keep things fair,' she said. 'Other tenants manage their guests without issues, but I've had complaints in your case. This isn't personal. If you need me to resend the house rules, I will. If you can't follow them, I'll have to review whether this tenancy is still working.' However, Cameron refused to back down as he called on the landlord to 'review' his tenancy agreement as he feels this arrangement won't work for him. 'You know what? Review it. Go ahead. If you genuinely think having my girlfriend stay over three nights in a month is causing long-term impact to your kettle and your precious hallway, then this probably isn't the right place for me either,' he said. 'You've decided you're running a guest policy like this is some boutique hotel. You're billing tenants for having a personal life, and then acting shocked when someone pushes back. "House rules were made clear"? No, they weren't. 'You sent a welcome email with your preferences. That's not legally binding. The tenancy agreement says nothing about guest logs, pre-approvals or £25-a-night fines. You're trying to invent policies mid-tenancy and dress them up as boundaries. 'It's not professional. It's not legal. It's you overreacting. So yeah - review the arrangement. And while you're at it, review your understanding of landlord responsibilities.' It's unclear what happened next - but Jack disagreed with the landlord's move. 'She sounds like she's got control problems, we don't like people with control problems,' he said. The video has been viewed 540,000 - with many divided over the situation. 'If this is a shared house and he's renting a room, I'm actually with the landlord. It's not fair to his other room mates to pay extra for his girlfriend. If he's renting the place solo, he's in the right to invite anyone he likes over as often as he pleases,' one said. 'I'm on the landlord's side, other than it should be included in the tenancy agreement. If it's not in the tenancy agreement, then it's not a valid charge. But a charge for additional guests is reasonable,' another suggested. 'Well, first of all, a housemate snitched. Second, that's actually mad. Third, I've had housemates whose girlfriend pretty much were there all the time. Still snitching on them for that is crazy,' one explained. 'Doesn't matter if the landlord found out, they're not allowed to police when you have guests,' another added. RITA: It's been brought to my attention that your girlfriend has stayed overnight on multiple occasions this month. As outlined in the House Rules, overnight guests must be pre-approved and are limited to two nights per calendar month. Beyond that, a £25 ($A52.50) per night charge applies to cover shared space use and utilities. This will be included in your next invoice CAMERON: I've read the tenancy agreement. There's nothing in there about guest charges. No mention of pre-approvals either. Also, who exactly is keeping tabs on my bedroom? RITA: The rules were shared in your welcome email and are clearly displayed on the hallway noticeboard. Excessive overnight visits put pressure on the household. I've had complaints. If you want to avoid future charges, please limit stays or register guests in the log book provided. CAMERON: Let me get this straight. You're charging me £25 ($A52.50) per night because my girlfriend stays over a couple of times a week. That's £200 ($A420) a month, Rita. For someone sitting on a sofa and using the kettle. You've made up some "guest log" system that isn't in the tenancy. There's no approval process in the contract. No mention of fees. I live here because it's what I can afford. Now you're trying to backdoor in hotel charges? No. I won't be paying. And if this appears on my invoice, I'll be submitting a formal complaint. RITA: Cameron, I understand you're frustrated, but please don't speak to me like that. These rules are there to keep things fair. Other tenants manage their guests without issues, but I've had complaints in your case. This isn't personal. If you need me to resend the house rules, I will. If you can't follow them, I'll have to review whether this tenancy is still working. CAMERON: Rita, You know what? Review it. Go ahead. Because if you genuinely think having my girlfriend stay over three nights in a month is causing long-term impact to your kettle and your precious hallway, then this probably isn't the right place for me either. You've decided you're running a guest policy like this is some boutique hotel. You're billing tenants for having a personal life, and then acting shocked when someone pushes back. "House rules were made clear"? No, they weren't. You sent a welcome email with your preferences. That's not legally binding. The tenancy agreement says nothing about guest logs, pre-approvals or £25-a-night fines. You're trying to invent policies mid-tenancy and dress them up as boundaries. It's not professional. It's not legal. It's you overreacting. So yeah - review the arrangement. And while you're at it, review your understanding of landlord responsibilities.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Albanian burglar with almost 50 convictions wins the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes weren't extreme enough to "revolt" the public'
An Albanian burglar with nearly 50 convictions has won the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes were not extreme enough to "revolt" the public'. Zenel Beshi has been dubbed a 'genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat' to the UK by the Home Office, which said he should be deported. But upper immigration tribunal judge Leonie Hirst found his crimes were not of the 'very extreme' type that would cause 'deep public revulsion' - and let him stay. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the ruling was 'out of touch' as Beshi is 'clearly a danger to the British public', The Telegraph reports. 'It's time these judges started to prioritise protecting law-abiding British citizens instead of foreign criminals', he said. Mr Philp added foreign criminals, no matter where their crime was committed, should all be sent back to their country of origin, 'no ifs, no buts'. It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper proposes to change the law to make it harder to allow foreign citizens to stay in the UK on a human rights claim. Her suggested scheme would oblige judges to consider public safety more in such decisions. Beshi came to the UK in August 2020 - three years after he received a six-year prison sentence in Turin, Italy. As well as robbery and false imprisonment, he had been jailed for 44 counts of burglary and theft. But he failed to disclose his previous convictions upon his arrival in Britain. The Albanian applied for a European Economic Area (EEA) residence card, on the grounds he was a spouse of an EEA national. He was granted this, after his application was initially refused and he appealed. While he waited to hear back on this appeal, he applied for leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme. The Home Office, though, decided to deport him as a threat to the British public. Beshi appealed, which was upheld by a first tier tribunal, after a psychologist said he did not in fact constitute a 'serious threat' to society. They also said he posed a 'low risk' of reoffending. Ms Cooper appealed this decision - but an upper tribunal has now found Beshi not disclosing his previous convictions is of 'little relevance'. Judge Hirst said the deportation threshold and notions of rehabilitation had been applied correctly. She also lauded the legal arguments behind the decision to allow Beshi to stay as 'detailed, clear and well-structured'. The judge found there was no legal mistake to require overturning the decision - and allowed the criminal to remain. Almost half of Brits have no confidence that the police will show up if their home was burgled, a poll revealed earlier this year. Some 46 per cent of adults said they did not believe a home burglary would be properly investigated, with 49 per cent saying the same for car thefts. When looking at pensioners, with 54 per cent of those aged 65 or older expressing a lack of confidence in officers attending their property. And fears are not unjustified, as police failed to solve 94 per cent of burglary cases in 2023/24, according to Home Office figures. Just 16,912 (six per cent) of 266,215 recorded burglaries resulted in a charge. In nearly three-quarters of cases police officers were unable to even identify a suspect, and a further 15 per cent ran into evidential difficulties after a suspect was identified. Reported burglaries have fallen in the past decade, from around 444,000 in 2013/14 to the more than 266,000 in 2023/24. Meanwhile, 13 per cent of people move house because they cannot bear to stay in their home after it has been burgled. A similar proportion have said they are unable to stand being home alone after their house has been invaded. A Home Office spokesperson has previously said: 'We do not agree with this judgment and are considering options for appeal. 'Foreign nationals who commit crime should be in no doubt that we will do everything to make sure they are not free on Britain's streets, including removal from the UK at the earliest opportunity.'
