Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 days. The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 says any board advertising a property for sale or to let must be removed within 14 days of the completion of the sale or granting of tenancy.


Send complaints to Southwark Councils contact centre [email protected] and their trading standards acts pretty promptly.

Tell them your address (for their records), the the address the board is outside, how long it's been there i.e. longer than 14 days, whether they say 'Let' or 'Sold' and the name of the estate agent. The contact number of the estate agent taken from the board may also quicken the process.


At the end of the day it's the law that the board shouldn't be there more than 14 days but the lots of estate agents seem to ignore that unless nudged. Or they claim to have an issue with their board erector and didn't realise it was still there.


Good luck

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> just rip them down and if you have time to spare,

> leave them on the EA office doorsteps



Or better....walk right in on a Saturday morning and politely place it gently on the managers desk. I did this at Bushells once - Winkworth are clearly the worst for this. I had one outside for almost a year!

A couple of years ago, we acquired a "To let" sign, probably intended for a house a little futher along, when we weren't to let. I rang the EA, they didn't move it, so we adapted it to advertise the school fair, naturally covering up any mention of the EA. By some co-incidence, the following year, lots of "School Fair sponsored by XYZ EA's" appeared all over ED and Nunhead. Even the school Friends group I was in, jumped on the band wagon. I didn't have one outside my house - my personal experience of EA has been uniformly negative.

If you really get fed up of a sign:

[a] alter the words to say what you think of the EA

cut it up for fire wood

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Mad that on a thread about the telegraph (and are we saying they  are a paragon of reporting? Are we?) it just happens to be the bbc and only the bbc copping the flak headnun - I’m not sure your point about despicable people “hanging themselves” holds up in a world where despicable people appear to be taking over in so many places  for too long, these people have been given equal airtime to normal people, creating a false equivalence - the result being a lot of people seem to think “well if one person thinks smoking is bad for you and one person thinks it’s good for you, who am I to say who is right and wrong”      
    • you're witnessing "Natural Selection" the core mechanism behind the theory of evolution which determines if organisms will survive long enough to produce offspring
    • Maybe Angelina did see them, however how many people and drivers didn't?  Just takes one to cause life changing for both.  Wouldn't it be more sensible if cyclists realised lights and reflective gear is not just to help them see but to potentially save their lives by making them visible to all. 
    • I agree with this, I'm afraid.  I see it every day within the industry - a lot of it is to do with the fact that the people working in it are younger now and don't realise how much they're being subconsciously indoctrinated by certain forces (social media and group-think), so they're now pathologically incapable of objectivity. Also, they don't read books, pick up the phone to experts, or generally know how to research properly.  On a lot of documentaries I've worked on, I've been leant on hard to peddle narratives that are not only heavily biased, but often outright inaccurate, and I've fought back where I can. It's really depressing,  I'd like to think that, at the BBC, I'd be immune from these influences, and allowed to project a 360 view, but it's sadly  not the case. You'd also be surprised at how toothless the BBC can be when presented with something that's irrefutable but could, say, upset Murdoch or the DM...  Hands up, I'm guilty of platforming extreme right-wingers, misogynists, anti-abortionists, racists, anarchists, pro gun lobbyists, rape-apologists... you name it, I'm all for putting them in a programme. Even though I deplore what they stand for, it's important to me to have a counter-view, and they almost always hang themselves.  (Job done.)  It's funny that certain people are up in arms about Rockets posting 'misinformation' in the Traffic threads, but  seem OK with it in broadcast, as long as it aligns with their views. You have to ask yourselves, what is it that you really want? If it's an echo chamber then just watch Fox News or CNN, however you lean. But then what's the point of it all? I fear the ship's sailed, so I don't know why I bother. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...