TWO men from Plymouth have pleaded guilty to waste offences in Newton Ferrers.

The two workers were fined £400 and ordered to pay costs of £1,459, plus £40 in victim surcharges.

Daniel Small, a landscape gardener and workman Antony Fraser appeared before Torquay Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, January 29 to answer charges in respect of waste disposal from work carried out in Newton Ferrers in 2012.

Both men pleaded guilty to offences relating to the failure to provide written descriptions of the waste removed from a site where they were working in Newton Ferrers.

Small failed to provide written transfer notes in contravention of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to show what material he had deposited, when and where. He accepted that a written description was required for waste when moved and that he had failed to provide any.

He was fined £100 for each of two offences, ordered to pay costs of £729.50 and a victim surcharge of £20.

Fraser had taken over the site from Small and had dismantled a shed with an asbestos roof.

While some of the asbestos sheeting had been removed by a local man, Fraser admitted hiding broken up asbestos in a skip. The consequence was that the asbestos was illegally deposited from the skip and not discovered.

Fraser also admitted failing to provide any written description of the waste. He was also fined £100 for each offence, ordered to pay costs of £729.50 and a victim surcharge of £20.

Cllr Rufus Gilbert, South Hams executive member for environment services, said: 'This is a clear indication that cutting corners can result in serious financial penalties to those caught. Waste must be accounted for when transferred to enable it to be properly monitored, particularly if the waste is hazardous, such as asbestos.

'The council has a zero tolerance policy in respect of fly tipping and associated crimes and will always brings those involved to account where they are identified. The penalties imposed by the court were as a result of the defendants' statements of means. It was important that the council recovered its costs to ensure that the local tax payers were not disadvantaged by bringing such prosecutions.'