What can I do to stop Door-to-Door salespeople ?

dispossessed

London50 said:

also look at  the Blink xt2 camera on Amazon. Has motion detection that can be set and 2 way audio without them  knocking or ringing at your door

Many thanks for suggesting this as it also addresses the issue of people choosing not to use the knocker or bell provided.

Whilst not preventative it would at least prevent me having to leave my desk to speak to the individual at the door. The two year battery life is also impressive. Our current CCTV set up is analogue and wired.

Sincere thanks - much appreciated.

Arthur

Jackmydad

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

Yes, I read it, but then I read "The Triumph of Surgery" by Jurgen Thorwald, many, many years before the internet was around as well.
One thing having an open mind, and a belief in the possibility of success, where there is at least a chance of that success.
We have to work within the framework of what is actually possible, or what theory says is possible in some cases, and not what we would simply like to be possible. 
And again, the study of human behaviour is indeed a science.
It may be useful in some cases.
Good luck with using it to modify the behaviour of salesmen. 

Parliament passed a law that outlawed smoking in public houses. How often do you see someone smoking in a public house ? That demonstrates success in modifying the behaviour of chemical addicts. They may still be addicted but they comply with the law.

If law were of no value we would have anarchy. We don't. 

Arthur

Don't we have anarchy?
At least in some ways.
What about the recent beach gatherings and street parties. . .
And the law on not smoking in pubs, (and thanks if you had anything to do with that one!) is easily enforced. Pubs have a landlord, who's licence can be removed if needed. Very few would risk that.
So no smoking in pubs.

You make a law saying people can't cold call by knocking on your door, and it gets more complicated. Who can't knock on your door exactly? Why can't they call?
Why would they take any notice? The telephone callers certainly don't.
What are you going to do when somebody does knock on your door? How are you going to stop them or prosecute them? Can you really see the police being interested? 
So even if you don't have the big, traceable companies doing it, the one man shows are still going to be there. 

It's all a very interesting argument, but I really can't see it being all that easy in the real world. Good luck with doing something. I sincerely mean that, but as I said earlier, the tarmac boys will still be there IMHO.

dispossessed

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

Yes, I read it, but then I read "The Triumph of Surgery" by Jurgen Thorwald, many, many years before the internet was around as well.
One thing having an open mind, and a belief in the possibility of success, where there is at least a chance of that success.
We have to work within the framework of what is actually possible, or what theory says is possible in some cases, and not what we would simply like to be possible. 
And again, the study of human behaviour is indeed a science.
It may be useful in some cases.
Good luck with using it to modify the behaviour of salesmen. 

Parliament passed a law that outlawed smoking in public houses. How often do you see someone smoking in a public house ? That demonstrates success in modifying the behaviour of chemical addicts. They may still be addicted but they comply with the law.

If law were of no value we would have anarchy. We don't. 

Arthur

Don't we have anarchy?
At least in some ways.
What about the recent beach gatherings and street parties. . .
And the law on not smoking in pubs, (and thanks if you had anything to do with that one!) is easily enforced. Pubs have a landlord, who's licence can be removed if needed. Very few would risk that.
So no smoking in pubs.

You make a law saying people can't cold call by knocking on your door, and it gets more complicated. Who can't knock on your door exactly? Why can't they call?
Why would they take any notice? The telephone callers certainly don't.
What are you going to do when somebody does knock on your door? How are you going to stop them or prosecute them? Can you really see the police being interested? 
So even if you don't have the big, traceable companies doing it, the one man shows are still going to be there. 

It's all a very interesting argument, but I really can't see it being all that easy in the real world. Good luck with doing something. I sincerely mean that, but as I said earlier, the tarmac boys will still be there IMHO.

I can't claim any credit for the smoking ban in pubs. The precedents within which I played a role are far more mundane.

Apropos street parties and beach gatherings - I don't view them as anarchy (except perhaps very localized anarchy) but more as a demonstration that the police have (apparently) lost the ability to police. The gatherings on beaches in particular was foreseeable and street parties tend to begin small and grow as word gets around. To an extent one could predict some likely locations - particularly in London. A few officers in the vicinty early on might have been a deterrent - then again perhaps not. It's always easy to be wise with hindsight.

If I succeed (assuming I do launch some action) - Why will charity collectors call when the charity can have its charitable status removed. Why will any company send out representatives when they might be held vicariously liable. That accounts for about 40 - 50% of cold callers. I completely agree with you that it may have less of an effect (if any) on the freelance roofers, tree pruners and tarmac layers but a reduction with the others would still provide a significant improvement. I accept it would not eradicate the activity 100%.

Curiously around our neighbourhood, the local constabulary do follow up reports of cold callers. They were very quick to respond to the one I mentioned who was dressed as an air ambulance paramedic and fairly quick with some of the others. Not exactly blue lights and The Sweeney but certainly dealing with it within thirty minutes. Perhaps the Chief Constable shares my dislike of the activity. Who knows.

Ultimately any attempt to be legally creative to prevent the activity (I have a couple of ideas) will have to wait until next year as I am busy working on something else at present.

Off topic but related to your reading - you might enjoy Brother Surgeons by Garet Rogers. A rather rare book but copies have been known to appear in charity shops and although a fictionalized story about the Hunter brothers a thoroughly good read IMHO.

Arthur

Jackmydad

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

Yes, I read it, but then I read "The Triumph of Surgery" by Jurgen Thorwald, many, many years before the internet was around as well.
One thing having an open mind, and a belief in the possibility of success, where there is at least a chance of that success.
We have to work within the framework of what is actually possible, or what theory says is possible in some cases, and not what we would simply like to be possible. 
And again, the study of human behaviour is indeed a science.
It may be useful in some cases.
Good luck with using it to modify the behaviour of salesmen. 

Parliament passed a law that outlawed smoking in public houses. How often do you see someone smoking in a public house ? That demonstrates success in modifying the behaviour of chemical addicts. They may still be addicted but they comply with the law.

If law were of no value we would have anarchy. We don't. 

Arthur

Don't we have anarchy?
At least in some ways.
What about the recent beach gatherings and street parties. . .
And the law on not smoking in pubs, (and thanks if you had anything to do with that one!) is easily enforced. Pubs have a landlord, who's licence can be removed if needed. Very few would risk that.
So no smoking in pubs.

You make a law saying people can't cold call by knocking on your door, and it gets more complicated. Who can't knock on your door exactly? Why can't they call?
Why would they take any notice? The telephone callers certainly don't.
What are you going to do when somebody does knock on your door? How are you going to stop them or prosecute them? Can you really see the police being interested? 
So even if you don't have the big, traceable companies doing it, the one man shows are still going to be there. 

It's all a very interesting argument, but I really can't see it being all that easy in the real world. Good luck with doing something. I sincerely mean that, but as I said earlier, the tarmac boys will still be there IMHO.

I can't claim any credit for the smoking ban in pubs. The precedents within which I played a role are far more mundane.

Apropos street parties and beach gatherings - I don't view them as anarchy (except perhaps very localized anarchy) but more as a demonstration that the police have (apparently) lost the ability to police. The gatherings on beaches in particular was foreseeable and street parties tend to begin small and grow as word gets around. To an extent one could predict some likely locations - particularly in London. A few officers in the vicinty early on might have been a deterrent - then again perhaps not. It's always easy to be wise with hindsight.

If I succeed (assuming I do launch some action) - Why will charity collectors call when the charity can have its charitable status removed. Why will any company send out representatives when they might be held vicariously liable. That accounts for about 40 - 50% of cold callers. I completely agree with you that it may have less of an effect (if any) on the freelance roofers, tree pruners and tarmac layers but a reduction with the others would still provide a significant improvement. I accept it would not eradicate the activity 100%.

Curiously around our neighbourhood, the local constabulary do follow up reports of cold callers. They were very quick to respond to the one I mentioned who was dressed as an air ambulance paramedic and fairly quick with some of the others. Not exactly blue lights and The Sweeney but certainly dealing with it within thirty minutes. Perhaps the Chief Constable shares my dislike of the activity. Who knows.

Ultimately any attempt to be legally creative to prevent the activity (I have a couple of ideas) will have to wait until next year as I am busy working on something else at present.

Off topic but related to your reading - you might enjoy Brother Surgeons by Garet Rogers. A rather rare book but copies have been known to appear in charity shops and although a fictionalized story about the Hunter brothers a thoroughly good read IMHO.

Arthur

As far as  the "anarchy" goes, let's hope it stays localised. . .
Be interested in what you achieve to stop these people.
I do agree that something should be done about a lot of these type of things.
The phone ones are my own pet hate.
Thanks for the book recommend. I'll look out for it.

 

dispossessed

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

Yes, I read it, but then I read "The Triumph of Surgery" by Jurgen Thorwald, many, many years before the internet was around as well.
One thing having an open mind, and a belief in the possibility of success, where there is at least a chance of that success.
We have to work within the framework of what is actually possible, or what theory says is possible in some cases, and not what we would simply like to be possible. 
And again, the study of human behaviour is indeed a science.
It may be useful in some cases.
Good luck with using it to modify the behaviour of salesmen. 

Parliament passed a law that outlawed smoking in public houses. How often do you see someone smoking in a public house ? That demonstrates success in modifying the behaviour of chemical addicts. They may still be addicted but they comply with the law.

If law were of no value we would have anarchy. We don't. 

Arthur

Don't we have anarchy?
At least in some ways.
What about the recent beach gatherings and street parties. . .
And the law on not smoking in pubs, (and thanks if you had anything to do with that one!) is easily enforced. Pubs have a landlord, who's licence can be removed if needed. Very few would risk that.
So no smoking in pubs.

You make a law saying people can't cold call by knocking on your door, and it gets more complicated. Who can't knock on your door exactly? Why can't they call?
Why would they take any notice? The telephone callers certainly don't.
What are you going to do when somebody does knock on your door? How are you going to stop them or prosecute them? Can you really see the police being interested? 
So even if you don't have the big, traceable companies doing it, the one man shows are still going to be there. 

It's all a very interesting argument, but I really can't see it being all that easy in the real world. Good luck with doing something. I sincerely mean that, but as I said earlier, the tarmac boys will still be there IMHO.

I can't claim any credit for the smoking ban in pubs. The precedents within which I played a role are far more mundane.

Apropos street parties and beach gatherings - I don't view them as anarchy (except perhaps very localized anarchy) but more as a demonstration that the police have (apparently) lost the ability to police. The gatherings on beaches in particular was foreseeable and street parties tend to begin small and grow as word gets around. To an extent one could predict some likely locations - particularly in London. A few officers in the vicinty early on might have been a deterrent - then again perhaps not. It's always easy to be wise with hindsight.

If I succeed (assuming I do launch some action) - Why will charity collectors call when the charity can have its charitable status removed. Why will any company send out representatives when they might be held vicariously liable. That accounts for about 40 - 50% of cold callers. I completely agree with you that it may have less of an effect (if any) on the freelance roofers, tree pruners and tarmac layers but a reduction with the others would still provide a significant improvement. I accept it would not eradicate the activity 100%.

Curiously around our neighbourhood, the local constabulary do follow up reports of cold callers. They were very quick to respond to the one I mentioned who was dressed as an air ambulance paramedic and fairly quick with some of the others. Not exactly blue lights and The Sweeney but certainly dealing with it within thirty minutes. Perhaps the Chief Constable shares my dislike of the activity. Who knows.

Ultimately any attempt to be legally creative to prevent the activity (I have a couple of ideas) will have to wait until next year as I am busy working on something else at present.

Off topic but related to your reading - you might enjoy Brother Surgeons by Garet Rogers. A rather rare book but copies have been known to appear in charity shops and although a fictionalized story about the Hunter brothers a thoroughly good read IMHO.

Arthur

As far as  the "anarchy" goes, let's hope it stays localised. . .
Be interested in what you achieve to stop these people.
I do agree that something should be done about a lot of these type of things.
The phone ones are my own pet hate.
Thanks for the book recommend. I'll look out for it.

 

Just in case you are unaware - registering with The Telephone Preference Service (TPS)  may be of interest as may be the work of a chap called Jim Browning who uploads videos of his activities relating to nuisance telephone callers to YouTube. You might enjoy watching what he does ;-)

Kind regards,

Arthur

Jackmydad

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

dispossessed said:

Jackmydad said:

Yes, I read it, but then I read "The Triumph of Surgery" by Jurgen Thorwald, many, many years before the internet was around as well.
One thing having an open mind, and a belief in the possibility of success, where there is at least a chance of that success.
We have to work within the framework of what is actually possible, or what theory says is possible in some cases, and not what we would simply like to be possible. 
And again, the study of human behaviour is indeed a science.
It may be useful in some cases.
Good luck with using it to modify the behaviour of salesmen. 

Parliament passed a law that outlawed smoking in public houses. How often do you see someone smoking in a public house ? That demonstrates success in modifying the behaviour of chemical addicts. They may still be addicted but they comply with the law.

If law were of no value we would have anarchy. We don't. 

Arthur

Don't we have anarchy?
At least in some ways.
What about the recent beach gatherings and street parties. . .
And the law on not smoking in pubs, (and thanks if you had anything to do with that one!) is easily enforced. Pubs have a landlord, who's licence can be removed if needed. Very few would risk that.
So no smoking in pubs.

You make a law saying people can't cold call by knocking on your door, and it gets more complicated. Who can't knock on your door exactly? Why can't they call?
Why would they take any notice? The telephone callers certainly don't.
What are you going to do when somebody does knock on your door? How are you going to stop them or prosecute them? Can you really see the police being interested? 
So even if you don't have the big, traceable companies doing it, the one man shows are still going to be there. 

It's all a very interesting argument, but I really can't see it being all that easy in the real world. Good luck with doing something. I sincerely mean that, but as I said earlier, the tarmac boys will still be there IMHO.

I can't claim any credit for the smoking ban in pubs. The precedents within which I played a role are far more mundane.

Apropos street parties and beach gatherings - I don't view them as anarchy (except perhaps very localized anarchy) but more as a demonstration that the police have (apparently) lost the ability to police. The gatherings on beaches in particular was foreseeable and street parties tend to begin small and grow as word gets around. To an extent one could predict some likely locations - particularly in London. A few officers in the vicinty early on might have been a deterrent - then again perhaps not. It's always easy to be wise with hindsight.

If I succeed (assuming I do launch some action) - Why will charity collectors call when the charity can have its charitable status removed. Why will any company send out representatives when they might be held vicariously liable. That accounts for about 40 - 50% of cold callers. I completely agree with you that it may have less of an effect (if any) on the freelance roofers, tree pruners and tarmac layers but a reduction with the others would still provide a significant improvement. I accept it would not eradicate the activity 100%.

Curiously around our neighbourhood, the local constabulary do follow up reports of cold callers. They were very quick to respond to the one I mentioned who was dressed as an air ambulance paramedic and fairly quick with some of the others. Not exactly blue lights and The Sweeney but certainly dealing with it within thirty minutes. Perhaps the Chief Constable shares my dislike of the activity. Who knows.

Ultimately any attempt to be legally creative to prevent the activity (I have a couple of ideas) will have to wait until next year as I am busy working on something else at present.

Off topic but related to your reading - you might enjoy Brother Surgeons by Garet Rogers. A rather rare book but copies have been known to appear in charity shops and although a fictionalized story about the Hunter brothers a thoroughly good read IMHO.

Arthur

As far as  the "anarchy" goes, let's hope it stays localised. . .
Be interested in what you achieve to stop these people.
I do agree that something should be done about a lot of these type of things.
The phone ones are my own pet hate.
Thanks for the book recommend. I'll look out for it.

 

Just in case you are unaware - registering with The Telephone Preference Service (TPS)  may be of interest as may be the work of a chap called Jim Browning who uploads videos of his activities relatingin to nuisance telephone callers to YouTube. You might enjoy watching what he does ;-)

Kind regards,

Arthur

I was aware of it thanks.
Registered long ago.
Did nothing that I could tell.
The "Call Guardian" on the phone we have now, pretty well eliminates nuisance calls.

markin

The are many other options apart from ring, Youtube is where you will find videos on set up and pros and cons for them all.

What the rich do is have a locked gate with a camera and intercom along with a mailbox.

 

[Deleted User]

I have tried many techniques over the years to stop unwanted people at the door but to no avail. I find a roof top sniper and an assassin in a ghillie suit hiding in the buses to be the most effective. There are 2 certainties in the world; taxes and door stop dwellers.

dispossessed

markin said:

The are many other options apart from ring, Youtube is where you will find videos on set up and pros and cons for them all.

What the rich do is have a locked gate with a camera and intercom along with a mailbox.

 

Unfortunately there is a covenant in the freehold that prevents fences and suchlike being erected. We would dearly love to move into a gated community but there are none within a fair distance that would enable easy access for trains to London.

Arthur