Sunderland woman linked to discarded waste ordered to pay compensation
-(1).jpg?crop=3:2,smart&trim=&width=640&quality=65&enable=upscale)

Items connecting Samantha Bulmer, 37, of Ashton Square, Farringdon, were found in discarded trash near Silksworth Lane, Silksworth, on Thursday, August 1.
Sunderland City Council environmental officers visited her home to speak to her about the matter on Wednesday, August 21, magistrates in South Tyneside heard.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdWhen there was no reply, they served a notice to attend an interview eight days later by pushing a legal document through her letterbox.
Bulmer failed to attend the interview, planned for Thursday, August 29, and the matter was escalated to the council’s legal department.
She was summoned to court on Tuesday, May 13, to give an explanation but did not show up – and the case went ahead in her absence.
Magistrates found it proven that she had failed to comply with a section 108 requirement of the Environment Act 1995, to provide relevant information.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdTony Southwick, prosecuting for the council, said there was no evidence Bulmer was personally responsible for dumping the waste.
But he said she had failed to engage with the legal process to help the council find out who had.
The court was told it had cost £210 to remove the waste and £195 to investigate the matter, with £150 of legal costs.
Mr Southwick said the rubbish included three large bags of waste, possibly containing rubble, several other bags of trash and grass cuttings.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHe also said Bulmer had previously applied for eight permits to access the council’s waste recycling centre, which proved she knew what the correct procedure was.
Mr Southwick added: “On September 3 a letter was sent to her that she had failed to attend and that the matter was being referred to the legal department.”
Magistrates ordered Bulmer to pay only the £210 clean-up costs, after hearing she owed around £5,900 to the court in past fines.
Yvonne Cracknell, chair of the bench, said: “We feel that the other two items, she would not be able to pay because of the amount of money she is owing.”