A SMALL business owner who was fined $1500 for erecting a sign at a friend’s property says she feels she has been unfairly penalised by Great Lakes Council.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Cindy Sampson, who owns Loved Vintage Clothing on Kularoo Drive, was fined for not having a development consent from council for a small sign displaying her business name and phone number at a residential property on Breckenridge Street in April this year.
Ms Sampson says she was not given a warning from council to remove the sign before a ranger walked in to her shop and handed the fine to an employee.
“I had consent from my friend who lives at the property and I had received a print out of the advertising and signage exempt and complying development forms. From what I understood the sign I had placed met the criteria,” she said.
“$1500 is a lot of money for anyone let alone a small business owner. I don’t turn that sort of money over in a month.
“I feel like I’ve been ambushed. Small businesses should be supported by council not penalised.”
Great Lakes Council’s manager of waste, health and regulatory services John Cavanagh said prior to the sign at Breckenridge Street, Ms Sampson had erected signs on power poles and trees around town which she was asked to take down.
“Ms Sampson received a phone call and then a letter dated April 30 advising that her signs required consent from council and she would be liable for fines. These fines were not issued. A further phone call was made to her staff on May 13 advising the same.”
Mr Cavanagh said when council noticed the sign at Breckenridge Street, a letter was sent out on June 24 along with the fine dated June 18 attached.
He said the sign is classified as ‘off site promotional signage’ which requires consent from both council and the property owner.
He said Ms Sampson had been given more than enough warning.
“She was not advised specifically about the Breckenridge sign but advised all her signs needed consent,” he said.
“I am absolutely convinced she was given more warnings than others would get.
“Yes $1500 is a bit of a shock but I think procedural fairness has occurred. She has not been victimised. That is the fine for that particular offence.
“If she thought she could put a sign up at someone else’s property without council’s consent then she has misunderstood big time.”
Ms Sampson said she still feels as though she has been unfairly targeted.
“Yes I got warnings for the other signs and they were taken down but not for this one. If I had known I would have taken it down immediately but instead I got a fine two months later.”
Soon after receiving the fine, Ms Sampson sought legal advice and decided to make an appeal. The appeal, however, was later rejected as council’s investigation claimed she had been given enough warnings.
With legal fees proving too much to take the matter to court along with debt recovery pursuing her, Ms Sampson decided to pay the fine in full.
A letter to the editor in The Advocate’s September 3 edition titled ‘stop over regulation’ which detailed a warning a resident received from council for a for sale sign on his caravan, spurred Ms Sampson on to voice her concerns.
“I haven’t got it in for rangers but I do for bullies. Council should listen to its constituents and the people it is representing,” she said.
“I still feel like I’ve done nothing wrong.”
Mr Cavanagh said he believed the ranger involved had acted fairly.
“Our rangers wear live cameras so there is a record of footage. The ranger involved took the course he did after conferring with another ranger.”
Ms Sampson says she hopes her situation will ultimately make other business owners more aware.
“We have enough empty shops in Forster Tuncurry and have enough economic difficulties and regulations without council being heavy handed,” she said.
“I wanted this put out there to let other businesses know that this can happen to them too.”