What happened
On 12 August 2020 a Dudley Council litter warden, a 35-year-old man, saw women flicking cigarette butts from a car in Pickford Street, Kates Hill. He went to issue fixed penalty notices, and later saw the car again in Jasmine Street.
Raja Malik, 30, came out of a house and confronted him. The argument turned into racist abuse. Mohammed Nawaz, 50, then ran at the warden with a wooden mop pole and struck him so hard that the pole broke. The warden ran, was struck repeatedly, and was left with bruising.
Police forced entry to their Jasmine Street address on 30 August 2020.
The outcome
Both men pleaded guilty at Wolverhampton Crown Court. Malik was given nine months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, for assault and racially aggravated assault. Nawaz was given six months, suspended for a year, for assault and possession of an offensive weapon. Each was ordered to pay the warden £500.
Dudley Council’s chief executive, Kevin O’Keefe, wrote to the Attorney General, Michael Ellis QC MP, calling the sentences unduly lenient and the attack “unprovoked racially motivated”. The case was referred for review. Council leader Patrick Harley said the challenge was meant to “send out a clear message that we will do all we can to care for our staff”.
What went wrong
One warden, on a residential street, following a car from one road to the next. No source describes a colleague, a vehicle, a radio or a check-in for that shift. When Malik came out of the house, the warden was on his own in front of a doorway with people inside it.
Inspector Pete Sandhu of West Midlands Police said relatives in the house had urged the two men not to get involved, and that they ignored them. That detail matters for planning. The crowd around a fixed penalty is not always hostile, but it is always there, and it is how an argument in a street becomes an attack by two men.
When an assault on a colleague is answered with a suspended sentence, staff learn what the system thinks their safety is worth.
What it teaches
A fixed penalty for a cigarette butt is the smallest enforcement decision there is, and it ended with a man beaten by a broken pole. The risk decision is not the fine. It is whether to follow an offender to a second location, on foot, alone, after the first exchange has already turned.
Enforcement by evidence is the alternative. Record, withdraw, and let the notice or the prosecution arrive in the post. That is a policy question, not a courage question, and it has to be answered before the shift starts.
The Dudley response is the other model worth copying. When a sentence does not match the risk your staff carry, saying so in public is part of looking after them.
Our lone working training covers enforcement visits and when to withdraw.
Questions for the room
- When does issuing a fixed penalty become a risk decision, and who makes it: you, your supervisor or the policy?
- What is your rule on following an offender to a second location?
- Who is watching the street while you write the notice?
- If a sentence against one of your staff is too lenient, who in your organisation would say so?
Evidence and limits
Confidence: confirmed. The Mirror, the Birmingham Mail and Dudley Council’s own news release were read in full and agree on the attack, the sentences, the compensation and the council’s letter. The pack dates the attack to 12 August 2020 and the sentencing to May 2021; the vault record gives 2021 for the incident. This page uses the pack’s dates. No source describes the council’s lone working arrangements for its wardens, so none are asserted here.
Sources
Reviewed 20 October 2026.