Key Points
- Camden Council issued a fixed penalty notice (FPN) to Rakesh Bhimjiyani, retailer at Costcutter Hampstead, for alleged fly tipping during shop refurbishments.
- The FPN was issued on 20 October by an officer from Kingdom Local Authority Support, a third-party contractor hired by the council.
- Bhimjiyani disputed the fine, presenting evidence that waste was properly managed and cleared by workmen daily.
- Camden Council initially refused to withdraw the fine and threatened court action if not paid.
- Following intervention by Better Retailing, Kingdom Local Authority Support admitted the fine was “issued in error” and retracted it.
- The enforcement officer involved received retraining to prevent future similar occurrences.
- Proposals from UK ministers suggest councils may be required to end contracts with private agencies earning significant commissions on fines.
- This case reflects wider concerns among retailers about incorrect FPNs issued by councils and their contractors.
What happened with the Camden Council fine issued to Rakesh Bhimjiyani?
On 20 October 2025, Camden Council issued a fixed penalty notice (FPN) to Rakesh Bhimjiyani, owner of Costcutter Hampstead, located in north London, accusing him of fly tipping during renovation works outside his store. The notice came from an officer representing Kingdom Local Authority Support, a private company hired by Camden Council to enforce waste disposal regulations.
As reported by journalist Sarah Thompson of Better Retailing, Bhimjiyani strongly contested the allegation. He explained the situation:
“There is a side window area where we display our produce and works had been going on there for approximately three weeks. We have always cleared up after ourselves.”
He added that CCTV footage clearly showed the refrigeration engineer working near the enforcement officer and that the workmen routinely removed waste materials at the end of each day.
Despite this, Bhimjiyani recalled,
“The officer could have very easily asked: ‘Was that his waste and was he going to clear it?’ Instead, he decided to issue a penalty, even after me speaking to him and explaining that the workmen always cleared up when they finished.”
Bhimjiyani described his frustration, noting his long-term commitment to reporting fly tipping in the area:
“In the past 10 years I have lodged over 500 reports.”
How did Camden Council respond to Bhimjiyani’s appeal against the fine?
Initially, Camden Council did not withdraw the fine and instead insisted on payment, threatening court action if Bhimjiyani failed to pay by the deadline. The retailer’s appeals were met with resistance from the local authority and enforcement officers.
According to Better Retailing’s coverage by Sarah Thompson, Bhimjiyani expressed scepticism about the contractor, Kingdom Local Authority Support, stating,
“When I Google Kingdom Local Authority Support, there are many reports of councils up and down the country that have ceased or reviewed association with them. It almost feels like they have a quota to meet and a financial interest in handing out as many penalty notices as they can.”
What led to the fine being withdrawn?
Following Bhimjiyani’s dispute, Better Retailing contacted both Camden Council and Kingdom Local Authority Support to advocate on his behalf. A spokesperson for Kingdom Local Authority Support confirmed that after a “thorough review of all the evidence,” it was concluded the penalty notice “had been issued in error.”
The spokesperson said:
“We are pleased that the business owner made use of our clear, accessible representation process and the outcome of the review has now been shared with the business owner.”
They also revealed that the enforcement officer involved has undergone retraining
“to ensure they are clear on what constitutes an FPN to avoid reoccurrence in the future.”
Kingdom Local Authority Support emphasised that since July 2022, they have been working to keep Camden’s streets cleaner and that “less than 0.01% of our FPNs result in a complaint.” They defended their broader mission, where officers are
“dedicated to tackling littering and fly-tipping across towns and cities across England, helping to ensure that everyone can enjoy well-maintained public spaces.”
What wider implications does this case have for councils and private enforcement contractors?
The case comes amid growing scrutiny of the role private agencies play in issuing fines for littering and fly tipping in England. Ministers have announced potential crackdowns proposing that councils end contracts with agencies that earn between 50% and 100% of the fines they serve. This financial incentive has raised concerns about enforcement fairness and potential overzealous fining practices.
The Guardian reported similar retailer grievances elsewhere. For instance, Nishi Patel, owner of Londis Bexley Park in Dartford, was fined last year after being accused by his council of fly tipping simply for placing banners celebrating his store’s 20th anniversary.
These cases illustrate tensions between local authorities, third-party enforcers, and small businesses that feel unfairly targeted or insufficiently heard in the appeals process.
Who is Kingdom Local Authority Support, and why are they controversial?
Kingdom Local Authority Support is a private contractor engaged by councils nationwide to augment enforcement on littering, fly tipping, and waste management. They conduct patrols and issue fixed penalties when waste control laws are breached. However, as Bhimjiyani noted, various reports have emerged about problematic practices and numerous councils have reviewed or terminated relationships with the company.
The firm’s recent statement to Better Retailing acknowledged the rare incidents leading to complaints—under 0.01% of issued fines—but admitted the need for clearer guidance and officer training to reduce errors.
What has been the response from Camden Council?
Camden Council has not provided a direct statement to Better Retailing regarding this specific incident. However, the withdrawal of the FPN following the review by Kingdom Local Authority Support indicates council acceptance of the error and willingness to cooperate with appeal outcomes.
What does this mean for retailers and local enforcement moving forward?
This case sets a precedent reminding councils and enforcement contractors to apply more rigorous scrutiny before issuing fines that carry significant legal and financial consequences.
For retailers like Bhimjiyani, the episode illustrates the difficulty of navigating enforcement actions by third-party contractors who may have aggressive targets or misunderstandings of individual circumstances.
It also highlights the importance of accessible appeal mechanisms and transparent review processes to ensure fairness and maintain trust between local authorities and businesses.
