COMPLAINTS MADE BY SHOPKEEPERS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19118, 10 July 1930, Page 6

COMPLAINTS MADE BY SHOPKEEPERS.

CONTEND REGULATION IS UNREASONABLE. Complaints were made to-day by •ertain shopkeepers that the by-law prohibiting the displaying of goods beyond the building line of shops was made unreasonable in its operation because City Council inspectors were not permitted to exercise discretion in the matter. It was stated that shopkeepers whose goods had protruded only a few inches had been ordered to take the articles inside, and had thereby lost much custom. It is understood that a deputation of shopkeepers to wait on the City Council is being arranged. Lost Trade. Some shopkeepers in Sydenham stated that they had been able to dis- ! play their goods outside without any ! interruption to the street traffic. ReI cently, however, the City Council had I apparently determined upon a “raid” of such shops, and had ordered the ■goods to be taken inside. It was claimed by occupiers of premises that they had lost a good deal of trade thereby, as the public were led to believe that the shopkeepers had ceased to stock those goods when their display had ceased. In one case, it was claimed, a widow went out of the fruit and vegetable business because her sales decreased alarmingly. In another instance the takings had gone down by one third. Strict Interpretation. Enforcement of the regulation was not confined to fruit and vegetables, but included hardware, which covild not possibly suffer any ill-effects through exposure to the open street. There was not a great deal of pedestrian traffic on the footpaths on which the shops fronted, and the fact that the goods protruded three or four inches did not obstruct traffic. What was described as the very strict and unreasonable interpretation of the regulation was proving a hardship to small shopkeepers, and was unnecessary. It was further contended that if the regulation were to be strictly enforced, all shopkeepers should be compelled to abide by it, and not only the scattered few who had been visited by inspectors. These officers were recommended to take action in regard to the old High Street post office, which, according to the survey pegs, was protruding about eight inches on to the footpath in Tuan Street. Inspector’s Viewpoint. The chief city inspector (Mr L. Hardie), when questioned on the matter, said that the cases brought to the Magistrate’s Court yesterday were the first for four years, which showed that the Council had not pressed the bylaw unreasonably. In cases where goods protruded a few inches ,no action had been taken, but some shopkeepers had gradually edged their goods further and further from the street line. It was only when the bounds of reason were exceeded that action was taken.