Based on this news
tinyurl.com/4677r9
I see plenty of people do that. I myself had done this in the past.
Is that really illegal?
|
|
Judging by the smile on his face he's not that bothered about it.
Edited by L'escargot on 30/06/2008 at 10:34
|
|
|
Apparently so, according to the council involved if left on view in certain circumstances...:-)
Furthermore, my local council and police began a clampdown a while back on cars being left on major and minor roads with For Sale signs on the windows by "traders", because the vehicles were proving a serious road hazard and the fact that the selling practice is being (hopefully) stamped out.
|
|
A similar story was in a local paper. Someone had a for sale sign in their car window while parked in a council run car park. It was never followed up, so I guess common sense prevailed.
|
|
|
|
So are signs on vans saying "To hire this van call ....", or "For Hire" signs on taxis also illegal? Isn't that trading in the street?
|
|
The difference is that these companies are registered and presumably pay their dues and demands.By my mothers house in Bradford one chap has four cars in the main road and a caravan,I think leeds said one was ok two was a business but that is hard to prove because they put different mobil phone contact numbers in their adverts Its reached plauge proportions in some areas.If you can run a business with no running overheads I suppose its unfare trading compared to a legitimate company.
|
Its control freakery taken to an extreme - and a reason why this wonderful country's liberal attitudes have taken a nose-dive of late, power crazed council workers who are accountable to no-one have taken control - taking RIPAs out for dog fouling - abuse of power.
By the way what constitutes a "fully loaded" Escort convertible ?
|
|
A skip ? No actually, on second thoughts that was a .......... :-)
Edited by Shoespy on 30/06/2008 at 12:55
|
It is hard enough to make a living, or perhaps even exist, in a country where REAL inflation is knocking on 10%. What can possibly be wrong with someone having a "For Sale" on a road legal (Taxed, Insured, MOTd),vehicle legally parked in a public place?
Councils may say it is illegal but that shows the depth of their detachment from the real world that the rest of us exist in!
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 30/06/2008 at 13:33
|
|
|
|
By the way what constitutes a "fully loaded" Escort convertible ?
It means with every standard and optional toy under the sun plus extra-wide alloys and a garish body kit.
Only a bog standard American would find the idea remotely appealing. To a 'reasonable man' (I believe this is a complex legal concept sometimes mentioned by judges PU?) fully loaded means:
1: heavy
2: complex and fault-prone
3: initially expensive, subsequently tatty and valueless
I hate fully loaded cars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are two "laws" involved.
One is the new one which says "Selling two or more vehicles on the highway within 500 metres of each other, is an offence under Section 3 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 "
The other is the local by-law, as enacted by Barnet Council.
As movilog's link says:
"Barnet council said the rule was introduced to keep parking space free for residents. A spokesman said: 'New parking contravention codes were introduced on April 4, 2007.
'A new code was introduced with the description of "using a vehicle in a parking place in connection with the sale or offering for sale or exposing for sale the goods when prohibited".
'The council's position is currently that we do not encourage or support trading from the public highway, including offering vehicles for sale. The council is undertaking a comprehensive review of this policy and will make a decision as to its viability after all of the options available to support our corporate priorities have been investigated.' ""
Because of the furore caused [this item was covered on London BBC news last week
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7478551.stm ], Barnet have had to rethink. Apparently, every private car owner who has questioned the ticket has had it cancelled. It is suspected that Batnet realise that they would have a difficult time proving that selling your private car once in a while constitutes "trading".
www.heraldseries.net/mostpopular.var.2264136.mostv...p
"In Britain, you could be caught out by at least two laws. Under one, it is an offence to have two or more cars for sale within 500 metres of each other, but you can avoid a £2,500 fine by proving you are not a business.
The other regulation is a street-trading law that makes it an offence to offer a car for sale in certain roads."
|
There seems to be a bit of confused thinking here.
1) Is the objection to "trading" in the street, ie advertising items for sale in your car window? Is that just to advertising cars, or any other items? So I could have a sign in my car window advertising "Logs for Sale" and that would be all right?
2) Is the concern about congestion? How does putting a For Sale sign in the window of a car that has to be parked somewhere anyway increase congestion?
|
1) Is the objection to "trading" in the street, ie advertising items for sale in your car window?
Barnet Council are using the street trading by-law as a catch-all. On their website, they say
"A licence is required to trade on the public highway, whether it is in the road, on the pavement or on ground that is not private but adjacent to and within seven metres of a street. A shop keeper can trade on his or her own private forecourt without a licence, but cannot let out the space to another trader unless that person has a licence.
Street trading is the selling, offering or exposing for sale any item or article or service in the street. This includes not only stalls but shop-front displays and café tables and chairs with service. A licence is for the sole use of the person named. It specifies the location and position, commodities or service that may be sold, and the days and times that the licence holder may trade. A licence holder who trades with a time-expired licence, or on a day or at a time or place other than that stated in his licence, is trading illegally. "
|
>> >> Street trading is the selling offering or exposing for sale any item or article or service in the street. This includes not only stalls but shop-front displays and café tables and chairs with service. A licence is for the sole use of the person named. It specifies the location and position commodities or service that may be sold and the days and times that the licence holder may trade. A licence holder who trades with a time-expired licence or on a day or at a time or place other than that stated in his licence is trading illegally. "
But you don't need a licence to advertise on your own vehicle? Millions of vans say "Joe Bloggs, Builders" with a phone number. They're not selling bricks from the back - what's the difference from advertising a car with a contact phone number?
|
.. what's the difference from advertising a car with a contact phone number?
I have already asked a member of my staff to email them about their silly application of this by-law, and to tell them that I think this amounts to abuse of power.
Why don't all those who agree do the same? Contact details phone, fax & email:
www.barnet.gov.uk/street-trading-illegal
However, I do think the law regarding selling two or more cars is properly aimed at catching traders.
Edited by jbif on 30/06/2008 at 15:23
|
>>>> I have already asked a member of my staff to email them >>
Why don't you do it yourself?
|
|
|
|
I do think certain drivers who do this should probably be sectioned rather than fined for displaying an advert.
Example one - advert on an A3 piece of paper fastened to passenger side of windscreen
Example two - advert on an A4 piece of paper fastened to drivers door window.
Example on was waiting at a set of lights
Example two was pulling away from a kerb.
Makes you wonder why manufacturers fit windows at all.
Both car owners were absolute idiots and for this reason alone it should be banned.
|
>>>>>>One is the new one which says "Selling two or more vehicles on the highway within 500 metres of each other, is an offence under Section 3 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 "<<<<<
Which only applies to traders not the general members of the public:
A person is not to be convicted of an offence if he proves to the satisfaction of the court that he was not acting for the purposes of a business of selling motor vehicles.
Whereas the other under Off Street Parking Order/By law can apply to all.
dvd
|
Selling two or more vehicles on the highway within 500 metres of each other, ... Which only applies to traders not the general members of the public:
Kind of a Catch 22. If as a general member of the public you sell two or more vehicles within 500 metres, you are likely to be deemed to be a acting as a trader unless you can prove otherwise. Or am I wrong? Who has to provide the proof?
I am still in favour of that law even if it catches out the few general members of the public who may for some reason happen to be selling two or more cars privately on the highway.
|
"If as a general member of the public you sell two or more vehicles within 500 metres, you are likely to be deemed to be a acting as a trader unless you can prove otherwise. Or am I wrong? Who has to provide the proof?"
Innocent until proved guilty I would have thought, but probably not in Gulag UK!
Why don't the council(s) deal with things that really matter like cyclists riding on the pavement illegally and the crusted coils of dog muck that seem to be part of the street furniture?
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 30/06/2008 at 15:41
|
>>the crusted coils of dog muck that seem to be part of the street furniture?
I don't know how they find the space to put it there between all the chewing gum!
(Peter Jones, Just a minute, 197?)
|
Firstly, it's a story - sorry, "story" in the Daily Mail, so it's probably rubbish.
I did have words with someone a few nights ago who had a for sale sign for his car on every window, including the windscreen. I pointed out that his car would be worth a lot less once he had banged into a few people due to not being able to see where he was going. This had not occurred to him.
I should point out he was doing about 45 through a 30 limit at the time...
|
Firstly, it's a story - sorry, "story" in the Daily Mail, so it's probably rubbish.
The Daily Mail has only just belatedly picked up this story. It has been running for some months in the local press and was picked up by the BBC only last week.
|
|
|
|
It's illegal in Lewisham, though as long as you aren't taking the mick then I don't think they are too bothered.
I remember when I first moved here there were some roads where 50% of the cars at the side of the road would have for sale signs in the window.
|
There used to be two or three parked in the main road on my block most of the time until residents' parking came in, not usually being sold by people who lived here so much as as aimed at people who might live nearby or be passing.
Even now there are sometimes one or two. It's a big borough although the process for getting resident's parking appears foolproof.
|
|
|
|
|
................... Why don't the council(s) deal with things that really matter like cyclists riding on thepavement illegally and the crusted coils of dog muck that seem to be part of the street furniture?
Hear, hear, (and slightly off-topic, but here we go...........)
Why some members of the public are criticising local authorities for so called "victimisation" of persons who allow their dogs to foul the pavements and roads is beyond me. Personally, I would throw the book at them. It has to be the original "anti-social behaviour" offence. Around the local primary and junior school where our children attend is a disgrace. It's almost like the owners allow their dogs to do it there on purpose.
The dog licence should have been put-up to £100+ a year to pay for the policing of it rather than scrapping it all together several years ago. And no I don't hate dogs, I just hate the owners of these animals who think it is okay to let their mutt open its bowels wherever they like, (so long as it not on their own doorstep).
Anyone who thinks it's not a problem have obviously not trodden it into the house and half-way up the stairs, or all over the car mat and pedals.
Rant over
|
"The dog licence should have been put-up to £100+ a year"
A sure fire way of making sure no-one would ever pay it.
|
"The dog licence should have been put-up to £100+ a year" A sure fire way of making sure no-one would ever pay it.
You didn't read the post properly.............the money should be used to police it.........okay make it £500 a year.
Are you a dog owner by any chance?
I like the way people "walk" their dogs...........what they really do it take it outside for a ****.
Edited by nick62 on 30/06/2008 at 18:27
|
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more. Compared to the chewing gum and dog carp, pools of regurgitated curry and special brew are hardly a problem even where I live.
If dogs have to evacuate their bowels in the public street, the gutter is the only place (not the small patches of earth around shade trees where these exist). Owners seen allowing dogs to do it on pavements should face a very stiff fine with the animal held hostage for say six weeks until it is paid, plus the animal's keep, and then sold or killed without the fine being rescinded. .
|
>>I like the way people "walk" their dogs...........what they really do it take it outside for a ****.
No! What we're doing is exercising the mutts (and ourselves - I put on two stone after one dog died). I shovel most of the stuff from my own garden, but the nature of the animals is such that when they get excited then they need to go, and many get excited at going for a walk.
I always carry at least two bags with me (it warms the hands nicely in the winter). If I need more than two bags, I don't need bags, I need blotting paper. ;>)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
