Measures soon likely to be considered nationally include extending enforcement options for councils, with fixed penalty notices and powers for seizure of goods among them. But full details of the possible new powers will not be known until a new consultation reviewing street trading legislation is issued shortly by the department for business, innovation and skills. And Chichester District Council's licensing and enforcement committee agreed on Friday to wait until the document was published before considering the possibilities for stepping up action against illegal trading in the city's main streets. A report considered at its meeting said complaints were regularly received about the problem from traders, the public and council members. Street trading was not allowed in the city, but pedlars holding a pedlar's certificate were lawful. To take enforcement action, the council needed to show traders were not acting as pedlars but as street traders. "The main difference between a pedlar and a street trader is that pedlars move from place to place, and that they approach people to make a sale," the report added. "This is the reason those trading can be seen to move their stalls on a regular basis." There were a number of ways traders sought to overcome attempts to prosecute them, including: n A different trader turning up each day, so the council had to go through a necessary initial one-hour observation and warning again. Having done that, yet another trader was present the next day. n Keeping moving, so as to attempt to act like a pedlar. "Unfortunately, due to the level of fines imposed by the courts, there is little or no deterrent value," said the report. "In addition, the courts seldom award full costs of taking the case to the council, meaning that every case the council takes involves local taxpayers meeting substantial costs." Regrettably, experience showed despite many hours of work by officers in carrying out investigations and taking prosecutions, it did not stop traders returning to street trade. Committee chairman Cllr Rob Field said part of the problem was the legislation involved was very old. Street trading was not a tremendous problem in Chichester, but there was a nuisance element. "Unfortunately, when prosecutions have been brought by the council, the fines imposed have not been enough to be a deterrent," he said. What do you think? Send a letter to news@chiobserver.co.uk or leave a comment below. Click here to go back to Chichester news Click here to go back to Bognor Regis news Click here to go back to Midhurst and Petworth news To tell us where in the world you are reading this story click here to add yourself to our readers' map.