No Cold Calling Options

[Andy Capp]

Yawn.


Yeah. the police are going to waste time on an initiative that is en-enforceable by law.......

.......they are the law........

*even bigger yawn* being a copper doesn't guarantee you know all the law. Plod get it wrong as well.

[dannyboy]

*even bigger yawn* being a copper doesn't guarantee you know all the law. Plod get it wrong as well.

this isn't a 'copper'. it is TVP.

[Simon Kirby]

The Socuts are to re-launch bob-a-job week it seems - see here.

I can just imagine the scene on Glendale Avenue:

Constable: "'Ello 'ello 'ello, what's all this 'ere then. Did you just knock on that door?"
Scout" "I was only asking if I could wash their car for charity officer."
Constable: "Were you indeed. Right then sonny, you're f*****g nicked."
Scout: "You won't take me alive copper, I have a woggle, and I'm not afraid to use it ..."

[Andy Capp]

this isn't a 'copper'. it is TVP.

So?

[Nothing Much]

Cripes ... what a nightmare.Bob-a-job week. I made it all up and forfeited my pocket money.
ce

[Guest_xjay1337_*]

The Socuts are to re-launch bob-a-job week it seems - see here.

I can just imagine the scene on Glendale Avenue:

Constable: "'Ello 'ello 'ello, what's all this 'ere then. Did you just knock on that door?"
Scout" "I was only asking if I could wash their car for charity officer."
Constable: "Were you indeed. Right then sonny, you're f*****g nicked."
Scout: "You won't take me alive copper, I have a woggle, and I'm not afraid to use it ..."

Quality.

ps what's a woggle?

[Nothing Much]

A woggle. Probably a bit like a Plonk. I still don't know the 3rd meaning,
I think there is another to do with trolling or things like that.

A necktie clasp. ce

[Nothing Much]

To be really honest. And I don't post on politics. A bit "Hitler Jugend".
ce.

[Guest_xjay1337_*]

A woggle. Probably a bit like a Plonk. I still don't know the 3rd meaning,
I think there is another to do with trolling or things like that.

A necktie clasp. ce

A le plonk, le jambon, le derriere.

[Nothing Much]

Thanks XJAY for the erudite reply. Nice to see you don't bother with accents.
I tried for a bit but I lost interest.
A widower now, I still keep a hope for a demoiselle.
We older folk never forget.

And I'm not even old as my kids say! They want the house.....and the cottage in Norfolk.
Medication Brewmaster? It is close by.
ce

[Guest_xjay1337_*]

I did try to get the accents but forgot te keyboard shortcut and I was too lazy to copy and paste.

Ouì

[Nothing Much]

Glad to hear you tried XJ. The Accents I mean.
I tried for a while. But I ended up with a circumcision instead of a circumflex.
As an older poster, I think la derriere is best for me.
ce

[Simon Kirby]

The Trading Standards Institute has a Cold Calling Control Zones Handbook.

It says:

Whilst No Cold Calling Zones have no force in law, the scheme should give householders the confidence to say “NO” and direct the cold caller out of the area.

No Cold Calling Zones have no force in law then. So there can't be any prosecution for knocking in a Zone. Zones tent to be set up with the cooperation of the police, Trading Standards, or the Council, and if someone knocks in the zone the resident is meant to phone the scheme organiser who will then send someone "official" round to have a word.

What I'm not entirely sure about is the exact nature of that "word", because although the cold callers are unwelcome, they aren't actually doing anything illegal. More significantly, the residents can choose what callers the zone excludes, and it's up to them if they want to ban Jehover's Witness, Trick or Treaters, Carol Singers, Boy Scouts, Political Activists, and Crusty Jugglers.

What most disturbs me from the handbook is that Trading Standards appear to endorse the local civilian scheme organiser sending threatening letters to people who have called in defiance of the zone which purport to have the legal authority of the Police or some other official body.

Irrespective of whether trading standards officers or police can make an immediate response, it is essential that where cold callers have been identified in a No Cold Calling Zone there is some follow-up action. One option is for somebody (preferably an official agency such as trading standards) to contact the person / business pointing out that they made a call in a ‘No Cold Calling Zone’, and advising accordingly. Whilst letters can be sent from the local scheme champion, it will carry much more weight if it has the support of partners such as the police or trading standards, or at least, includes their logo or reference to them.

[On the edge]

Presumably canvassing for votes is also cold calling. We can test how strong the effect is next time there is an election. Looking forward to it now!

Wholly agree with last post - yet another self appointed protection group for well meaning meddlers. Frankly, in this context quite sinister.

[Nothing Much]

Sinister or Dexter. I never could make my mind up. It was all Greek to me.
ce

[NWNREADER]

How it becomes enforceable

Part 3, Section 12, and Schedule 1 Para 25 creates the offence. Section 13 sets out the sanction, and Part 4 Section 19 underlines the duty to enforce.

So either the person ignores a request to go away, or the sticker displayed on the premises (see http://www.newburysound.co.uk/no-cold-calling-i-11266.php)

[Berkshirelad]

Sinister or Dexter. I never could make my mind up. It was all Greek to me.
ce

Er, latin

[NWNREADER]

How gauche

[blackdog]

The Socuts are to re-launch bob-a-job week it seems - see here.

Must save a few 5p pieces - seems a decent price to get the car washed, the lawn mowed and the dog walked.

[Simon Kirby]

How it becomes enforceable

Part 3, Section 12, and Schedule 1 Para 25 creates the offence. Section 13 sets out the sanction, and Part 4 Section 19 underlines the duty to enforce.

So either the person ignores a request to go away, or the sticker displayed on the premises (see http://www.newburysound.co.uk/no-cold-calling-i-11266.php)

I suggest that clause 25 doesn't make calling an offence, the offence is calling and then not leaving when asked to, or returning when asked not to.

That construction follows from the text of the Regulation which replicates that of the Directive: "Conducting personal visits to the consumer’s home ignoring the consumer’s request to leave or not to return, except in circumstances and to the extent justified to enforce a contractual obligation.". It's clearer still if you follow the travaux préparatoires back to the clause as originally proposed: "Conducting prolonged and/or repeated personal visits to the consumer's home ignoring the consumer's request to leave.", and see how the text developed in order to better prevent the trader from returning when asked not to. There was never a suggestion that Directive should prevent a trader making the initial call whether it would be welcomed or not.

This construction is consistent with the purpose of the Directive, that of preventing unfair business practices, especially the aggressive commercial practices under which heading Clause 25 appears in the Directive. The Directive isn't concerned with regulating the colateral problems of burglery, fraud, and the fear of strangers which is the apparent function of a NCCZ.

If the intention of the Regulations was to enable residents to create a NCCZ then clause 25 would have explicitly prohibited unwanted calling in the same way that clause 26. does for telephone calling: "Making persistent and unwanted solicitations by telephone, fax, e-mail or other remote media except in circumstances and to the extent justified to enforce a contractual obligation.".

So again, the Trading Standards Institute aren't suggesting that NCCZ have any statutory basis, so who exactly is saying this? It's a fair assumption that they're familiar with the position of the Trading Standards Institute, so I'd like to know whether they have a good reason to believe that the Regulations support a NCCZ, because if they're actually bluffing then I can't agree that's proper.