Lords revolt over fly-tipping law that penalises farmers

Farmers could finally be relieved of footing the bill for fly-tipped rubbish after the government was defeated in the House of Lords over what campaigners have branded an “utterly preposterous” injustice.

Under current law, landowners are legally responsible for removing waste dumped on their property. If they fail to clear it, they can be prosecuted for having controlled waste on their land — despite being the victims of the crime.

The system stems from the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which places liability on landholders. Critics argue that, in practice, it punishes victims while offenders frequently escape sanction.

The Lords’ intervention comes as new Defra figures reveal fly-tipping in England rose by 9% in 2024-25, reaching 1.26 million incidents.

Those figures only cover land managed by local authorities, excluding most private farmland — meaning the real total is likely far higher.

Of the 1.26 million cases recorded, councils carried out 572,000 enforcement actions. However, nearly 400,000 of those were investigations, leaving fewer than 200,000 actions that resulted in any form of sanction, including warning letters.

In effect, fewer than one in five incidents led to punishment.

Peers backed two amendments aimed at rebalancing responsibility.

Amendment 13, tabled by Lord Davies of Gower, requires the Secretary of State’s guidance to make clear that where someone is convicted of fly-tipping under the Environmental Protection Act, the offender should be liable for costs incurred through loss or damage.

It also calls for closer cooperation between waste authorities and police so that landowners are not left bearing the expense.

Amendment 21, tabled by Viscount Goschen, goes further. It would place a duty on local waste authorities to collect fly-tipped waste and seek to recover costs from offenders.

If implemented, the measure would remove clean-up costs from private landowners and create stronger incentives for councils to investigate and prosecute fly-tippers.

The government opposed the changes. However, after Amendment 13 passed despite ministerial resistance, Amendment 21 was accepted without being put to a vote.

Campaigners say the amendments would end the current system in which victims are penalised while enforcement remains patchy.

The Countryside Alliance, which has long criticised the framework, welcomed the vote.

Johnnie Furse, a spokesman for the organisation, said: “The government has a real opportunity here to end the ridiculous current system in which farmers and rural people are penalised for being victims of waste crime.”

He added: “Accepting these amendments would do much to repair the government's broken relationship with the countryside, showing rural communities that the government does care about justice for the people who live and work there.”

The amendments must now pass through the House of Commons, where ministers could seek to overturn or dilute them.

For rural landowners regularly forced to absorb clean-up costs running into thousands of pounds, the issue is simple: the polluter, not the victim, should pay.

The coming Commons stage will test whether the government is prepared to side with farmers — or defend a system peers have now openly challenged.