Main Reef Rd vendor cries foul over property removal
A long-time Main Reef Road vendor claims his property was unfairly removed and damaged, raising questions about municipal by-law enforcement.
A vendor along Main Reef Road shared his experience after claiming that his property was removed and damaged in the process.
Pieter Jacobs (56) said he has been a vendor along Main Reef Road for the past 29 years. Four weeks ago, his posters were removed and he was issued a R500 fine. He was then told to move his things to the side of the road. However, he explained that he did not get any business there, so he decided to move back to the middle section.
On October 1, his property was removed again, and he alleged that his posters were torn in the process.
Jacobs stated that in all his years doing business there, he had never experienced any trouble and had never been asked for a licence or permit to operate. He also expressed concern about other vendors along the same road whose stands were not removed.
Jacobs said he offers aircon re-gassing and windscreen repairs – a trade that helped him raise his four children. His wife, he added, is currently battling breast cancer, and Jacobs explained that all medical costs are paid out of his own pocket.
To understand why Jacobs’s goods were removed, it’s important to look at what the municipal by-laws say about street trading and advertising.
According to the Rand West City Local Municipality (RWCLM), anyone who wants to display posters, placards or advertisements on a public road must first get written permission from the municipality. Only approved signs, or those exempted under the Outdoor Advertising by-law, may be displayed.
The by-laws further state that municipal officials are allowed to instruct anyone to remove goods, vehicles or structures placed in a public area without permission. If the person fails to comply, officials may remove or confiscate the items.
Owners are responsible for paying any costs linked to the removal and storage of confiscated goods. The municipality also cannot be held responsible for any loss or damage that may occur during this process.
The RWCLM was approached for additional comment regarding the issue; however, none was received at the time of publication. Their feedback will be published once received.
What are your thoughts about this situation?
Should long-time vendors like Jacobs be allowed to continue trading where they have always been, or should the municipality strictly enforce its by-laws?
Share your thoughts by emailing us at [email protected] – we’d love to hear your views.



