Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
D1 Requirements included in respect orders
(1) A respect order that includes a requirement must specify the person (“the supervisor”) who is to be responsible for supervising compliance with the requirement.
The supervisor may be an individual or an organisation.
(2) Before including a requirement, the court must receive evidence about its suitability and enforceability from—
(a) the individual to be specified as the supervisor, if an individual is to be specified;
(b) an individual representing the organisation to be specified as the supervisor, if an organisation is to be specified.
(3) Before including two or more requirements, the court must consider their compatibility with each other.
(4) Where a court includes in a respect order a requirement the effect of which the court considers is to require the respondent to participate in a particular activity—
(a) the court must declare the requirement to be an “activity requirement” for the purposes of this Part, and
(b) the order must specify that the court has done so.
(5) It is the duty of a person specified as the supervisor in relation to a requirement—
(a) to make any necessary arrangements in connection with the requirements for which the supervisor has responsibility (the “relevant requirements”);
(b) to promote the respondent’s compliance with the relevant requirements;
(c) to inform the person who applied for the order and (if different) the appropriate chief officer of police if the supervisor considers that the respondent has complied with all the relevant requirements.
(6) If the supervisor considers that the respondent has failed to comply with a relevant requirement, the supervisor must inform the person who applied for the order and (if different) the appropriate chief officer of police unless—
(a) the supervisor considers that the respondent had a reasonable excuse for the failure, or
(b) section H1 applies (duty to give warning for breach of activity requirement).
(7) A respondent subject to a requirement included in a respect order must—
(a) keep in touch with the supervisor in relation to that requirement, in accordance with any instructions given by the supervisor from time to time;
(b) notify the supervisor of any change of address.
These obligations have effect as requirements of the order.
(8) In this section, “the appropriate chief officer of police” means—
(a) the chief officer of police for the police area in which it appears to the supervisor that the respondent lives, or
(b) if it appears to the supervisor that the respondent lives in more than one police area, whichever of the relevant chief officers of police the supervisor considers it most appropriate to inform.
Your change, as a redline
D1 Requirements included in respect orders
(1) A respect order that includes a requirement must specify the person (“the supervisor”) who is to be responsible for supervising compliance with the requirement.
The supervisor may be an individual or an organisation.
(2) Before including a requirement, the court must receive evidence about its suitability and enforceability from—
(a) the individual to be specified as the supervisor, if an individual is to be specified;
(b) an individual representing the organisation to be specified as the supervisor, if an organisation is to be specified.
(3) Before including two or more requirements, the court must consider their compatibility with each other.
(4) Where a court includes in a respect order a requirement the effect of which the court considers is to require the respondent to participate in a particular activity—
(a) the court must declare the requirement to be an “activity requirement” for the purposes of this Part, and
(b) the order must specify that the court has done so.
(5) It is the duty of a person specified as the supervisor in relation to a requirement—
(a) to make any necessary arrangements in connection with the requirements for which the supervisor has responsibility (the “relevant requirements”);
(b) to promote the respondent’s compliance with the relevant requirements;
(c) to inform the person who applied for the order and (if different) the appropriate chief officer of police if the supervisor considers that the respondent has complied with all the relevant requirements.
(6) If the supervisor considers that the respondent has failed to comply with a relevant requirement, the supervisor must inform the person who applied for the order and (if different) the appropriate chief officer of police unless—
(a) the supervisor considers that the respondent had a reasonable excuse for the failure, or
(b) section H1 applies (duty to give warning for breach of activity requirement).
(7) A respondent subject to a requirement included in a respect order must—
(a) keep in touch with the supervisor in relation to that requirement, in accordance with any instructions given by the supervisor from time to time;
(b) notify the supervisor of any change of address.
These obligations have effect as requirements of the order.
(8) In this section, “the appropriate chief officer of police” means—
(a) the chief officer of police for the police area in which it appears to the supervisor that the respondent lives, or
(b) if it appears to the supervisor that the respondent lives in more than one police area, whichever of the relevant chief officers of police the supervisor considers it most appropriate to inform.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.