Councillors hope for city-wide ban on cold-callers in Leicester
A city-wide ban on cold callers could be introduced to tackle rogue traders.
Councillors tasked with looking at how dodgy door-to-door tradesmen and salesmen operate in the city have made the recommendation in a new report.
-
Door-to-door sales could be banned throughout Leicester
They say it could be introduced using a council by-law, which could see traders fined for knocking on residents' front doors unannounced.
Ann Glover, councillor for Braunstone Park, is the panel's chairman. She said: "Criminals are trying their luck by targeting vulnerable and elderly people, and householders are often too scared to turn them away.
"A blanket ban on cold-calling would mean that people would feel more confident in their own homes, and be more likely to take the decision to simply close their doors on cold-callers."
The city's Trading Standards team has welcomed the proposal, but said it was unclear whether the council would be able to introduce it under current legislation.
Team member Roman Leszczyszyn said: "It's a good idea, because people don't want unsolicited salesmen or tradesmen visiting their homes. We would, however, need to explore whether we can legally do this, and who would enforce it.
"There are lots of issues that would need to be looked at. For example, should there be exceptions for organisations such as registered charities, or other organisations."
Laws dating back to 1972 provide councils with the power to create by-laws "for the good rule and government" of an area and for "the prevention and suppression of nuisances".
By-laws can be created with a council vote.
The laws must not conflict with existing national or European legislation, and must then be approved by a secretary of state.
However, even if the secretary of state thinks it is lawful and reasonable, it could still be challenged through the courts by anyone who thinks it is unlawful.
Official figures show there were 13 reported incidents of bogus callers in the city last year, but councillors say that represents just a fraction of the incidents which take place.
Knighton councillor Lynn Moore, who also sat on the panel, said: "Many of the people affected don't report it because they feel embarrassed or ashamed that they've been conned."
The panel's report recommends that tackling the issue should become one of the main policing priorities in the city.
It also calls for a publicity drive by public bodies, as well as banks and other private firms, to help educate vulnerable people about the risks surrounding doorstep trading.
It will be discussed at next Monday's neighbourhood services scrutiny committee, before eventually reaching city Mayor Sir Peter Soulsby and his cabinet.
10 Comments
by graydjames
Thursday, February 16 2012, 9:59AM
“It is most unfortunate that Davidh's extremist argument should devalue his otherwise valid questionning of this ridiculous suggestion.
I have said this before, but I think I found some evidence that it couldn't be so, but davidh's use of English is so reminiscent of Eastonian I really do wonder if they are one and the same.”
by AllstarLEI
Thursday, February 16 2012, 8:10AM
“@colarrey: You have had more luck with your sign than we have had with ours. Ours addresses advertising/flyers and we still get them almost daily!”
by Neil0123
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 8:33PM
“If this law is enacted then what about the many (although still a minority) members of the population that want to have the opportunity to learn about better utility deals or insulation products etc. Why should their views be ignored?
And I would much rather have the opportunity to "gain" on my doorstep from a better priced product rather than "lose" by just being allowed to receive cold-callers from charities who take money and give nothing back.
This sort of law opens up a can of worms.”
by colarrey
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 2:36PM
“They could always do the same as me.
Print off a sign stating "no cold callers, canvassers" etc, plenty on the internet, or for a couple of quid buy one.
It certainly works and if they do knock, then a polite pointing at the sign and asking "which part of no cold callers don't you understand? It does the trick!
(Also works at halloween)”
by davidh1967
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 12:13PM
“What do we ban next? Political parties that SPS and the city council don't agree with? This is a form of fascism, denying people there right to freedoms! I seem to recall it is part of the Human Rights convention that people have freedom of expression without the interference of authorities.”
by Eddie51
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 12:08PM
“Would this law/ruling also apply to to councillors, politician etc who cold call at election times to try and pursuade us to vote for them. Or are they classed as invited visitors, not that I have ever invited any of them.
After all they are doing it to try to make a living, all be it a very nice one
If not could anyone explain the difference.”
by prog_rock_fan
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 12:07PM
“An excellent idea!
Please DO ban cold-callers!”
by martin_le3
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 11:51AM
“@cjt72 - We find charity bags are useful when cleaning out our guinea pigs, so could do with a few more if anything.”
by Nanao
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 11:39AM
“Many cold callers work on comission only so they always go for the hard sell if visiting people at home. Perhaps enforcing that companies (*Cough* Montana Marketing *Cough*) give their staff a fair wage with comission. Thus limiting job losses and reducing hard selling. Although I am completely against the whole practice of pressure selling at the door to often elderly or vunerable people.”
by cjt72
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 10:45AM
“Whilst your banning cold callers, could you also ban charity bags. I find these more of a nuisance than cold callers. In the last year I've seen around 50 charity bags through my door, but have only had four cold callers.
Will the council monitor the number of job loses caused by this planned by-law?”