What Are No Soliciting Signs?
No soliciting signs are signage put up by homeowners and business owners to ensure that no trespassing occurs on their property, specifically for the purposes of unwanted solicitation. A no soliciting sign generally puts forth one of three no solicitation messages: no soliciting, no solicitors, or absolutely no solicitors. Most no soliciting signs are meant to be politely direct, but they typically do not leave room for interpretation. By displaying the sign, property owners are ensuring that they do not receive various types of solicitation , including sales calls and door-to-door sales or a variety of other unrequested communication. No soliciting signs are often used to prohibit people from trying to sell products, collect donations, ask for charitable contributions, offer services, or trying to sell or promote information about particular causes. It is important to note that no soliciting signs are generally not lawful for use against people who have a bona fide reason for being on your property. For example, if you post a sign that prohibits real estate agents from showing your home to prospective buyers, you may be violating anti-discrimination laws such as the Fair Housing Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Legal Impact of No Soliciting Signs
No soliciting signs are governed by a mix of local, state and federal laws. In general, property owners have the right to post no soliciting signs, which prevent any kind of solicitation on their property. Solicitors must adhere to these signs or risk facing potential legal consequences.
Many states have soliciting laws that vary from each other. Some states allow more freedom with what is considered a solicitation, and other states view it quite strictly. One common law includes a request for donations, which a local no soliciting law could prohibit entirely. Other states may only prohibit sales without permission. Figuring out what your state specifically prohibits can be a lengthy legal process, so consulting legal counsel could be worth it. When it comes to federal law, different elements and factors are involved. There’s a well-defined body of law surrounding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The TCPA (47 USC ยง 227) prohibits anything from unsolicited phone calls to junk faxes. In relation to this legislation, a no soliciting sign could be helpful in regards to having full legal protection when it comes to unwanted calls by telemarketers. However, no soliciting signs only provide enough protection so long as they’re posted correctly. Many aspects of private property are dictated by local or state law. In both type of law, objectivity matters. Property owners or others seeking to enforce the right to keep their property private must do so in a reasonable way. This means the property owner should be able to prove that the sign was clearly placed, and was intended to and did prohibit solicitation. Issuing a citation to a solicitor who violates a no soliciting sign is one way to approach enforcement. Many local communities and cities issue citations as a warning and then go about future enforcement with an official ordinance. Citizens may appeal any tickets they receive under those ordinances, but in general, citizens are required to abide by local no soliciting sign ordinances.
Enforcement Issues and How to Address Them
The challenge of enforcement becomes apparent with the first unwelcome ring of the doorbell or the light rap, rap, rap of a knuckle on the front doorframe. What does a property owner (or a tenant) do then? A neighborly smile is always welcome, but uneasy interactions are the norm when a sign is ignored. The offender may be on the other side of the door, and even though he may be able to read, he may not be able to understand. The awakening of the self-righteous warrior may help propel the unsoliciting resident to open the door. The problem involves forgetting the first rule of being an effective boundary setter, which we shall now call "the first rule." The first rule is the one that says to set boundaries up front, before the fact, so that they do not need to be enforced. If a homeowner places the no soliciting sign in the front yard, and says "No Soliciting" before anyone is at the door, then the issue is whether the solicitor will honor the request. It is not whether the homeowner’s sign will be observed. The issue is whether the person who observes the sign will obey it (if one is at all returned a few posts ago). It is the difference between seeing something and obeying something. Very often, pleasure from being the initiator of a thing, causes some people to overcome their own inhibitions and actually abide by the instructions from someone they don’t know. But this is not the way of solicitors, and countless homeowners can recount enough stories of lying toads ringing the doorbell and rap, rappin’ on the doorframe to testify to the reality that most solicitors feel entitled to ignore the signs. So what about enforcement? Is a favorite legal tactic – the cease and desist demand – an effective tool for persuading potential solicitors to observe the no soliciting sign? It might be, but once again, the legal rules do not tilt in favor of the homeowner where a private property right is concerned. Yet there are common sense solutions that can assist homeowners. For instance, if a property owner posts a no soliciting sign at the end of a long driveway, that should give someone pause to stop and think about how to get to the door. True, there are some who will not ever consult the sign, or who will jump out of their car, sprint up the driveway, and pound on the door hoping to be the unwanted source of attention. But other people will slow down and think about it. If the sign "No Solicitors" is coupled with another sign that reads "Haul Packages Only," and that signifies in large letters a steep fine, there are even more people who have a personal interest in keeping the driveway clear. Homeowners should apply the first rule and talk about this with their neighbors even before deploying the signs. That is why those signs are called "conspicuous." They are designed to be conspicuous in the same way that the Santa Ana winds on Sunday Night Football broadcast are designed to be conspicuous. When you see a lot of them, and when they are being blown through the sky with ferocious velocity, they will detonate in everyone’s mind that there is very likely something significant about them. So, what happens when more than one property owner in a neighborhood (alongside each other, or even across the street) posts a no soliciting sign? What if each sign suggests that together, the no soliciting signs will be enforced with sanctions that are detrimental to the soliciting party? That is the power of the conspicuous sign.
Exceptions and Limitations to No Soliciting Laws
Common Exceptions to No Soliciting Sign Laws
Certain types of solicitors may be legally allowed to ignore a no solicitation sign, depending on local and state laws. For example, political canvassing is generally allowed in most jurisdictions. A lot of homeowners choose to hang no soliciting signs on their private fences and at the base of their driveways out of distrust for strangers, but under political canvassing law, even the Supreme Court has determined that some restrictions must be made to protect free speech. Thus, solicitors are generally allowed to seek support for political campaigns even when signage presents otherwise. Similarly, nonprofit organizations are often the exception to restriction as well. These groups are commonly allowed to solicit door-to-door in order to raise funds for causes like neighborhood watch patrols, search and rescue missions, and land conservations. Likewise, group representatives for annual holidays and events that are sponsored by that particular neighborhood association are permitted to solicit for community events and to legally bypass signals placed at the entrance or exit of mobile home communities. Door-to-door sales and solicitations and trespassing laws are largely based on local ordinances, not state laws. These exceptions to door-to-door solicitation ordinances vary widely by city and type of solicitation, so before putting up a no soliciting sign on your property you should contact your local municipality for ordinances that apply to your area.
Permissible Installation of No Soliciting Signs
To legally install "no soliciting" signs on your property, the signage must be placed in an area that is clearly visible. This can include placing a sign on the primary entrance to your property, such as over your door or at your front gate that leads to your property. You may also put up additional no soliciting signs on fence posts leading to your property, but be sure to place those properly and in easily visible areas. The best locations for this are on solid wooden fence posts and/or driveway wooden posts. All of these signs should be visible from both directions of traffic, so don’t forget to install signs on either side of your entrance point and your fence posts. This is a critical step, as improper placement or lack of signage can result in any intended protective features being rendered useless from a legal standpoint.
There are a couple design recommendations for your no soliciting signs for legal purposes. Don’t use any bright neon colors or flashing lights. The exception is reflective tape or film . The primary reasons you don’t want to use bright colors or lights on your sign is because they can attract solicitors rather than deter them, and they can also lead to potential legal issues. For example, it is minorly illegal to stand or park on a public road, where such activity would obstruct traffic or create a hazardous condition. If your sign is too flashy and attracts attention and draws traffic, it could cause solicitors to stop and park in the middle of the road. This could also attract some of those solicitors like door-to-door salesmen which could draw private property trespassers to your home or office. These scenarios could make things dangerous for you and your family or employees, and could also complicate your ability to deal with the trespassers or solicitors.
The best way to make your signs is to utilize a simple white paper background with black letters for the no soliciting message. If you want to use color, you may use a black background with white letters, and the sign must still be visible from both directions.
Addressing Violations of No Soliciting Signs
While no soliciting signs are not legally binding in many jurisdictions, homeowners can still take measures against those who intentionally ignore them. The first step, of course, is to post such signs on your property. If someone approaches your home uninvited after you’ve done this, you have a better case for complaining. Be sure to take down the sign if you’ve posted it for only a limited time. You’re likely to look more sympathetic to a local government body if you’ve only recently put a no soliciting sign up, rather than putting one up over and over again. When someone shows up at your house after you’ve posted a no soliciting sign, be polite but firm. You might say something like, "I’m sorry, but we don’t want any salespeople coming to our house, and you need to leave our property right now." If the person refuses to go, your next recourse is to get law enforcement involved. Be prepared to provide both a picture of the offending sign as well as documentation that it was posted at the correct point in time. As with most property rights issues, government response may vary based on your jurisdiction’s local ordinances. In some areas, a homeowner may obtain a restraining order against the violator and thus prohibit that individual from stepping onto or traversing the offending property. Ordinances in some localities might even allow a homeowner to prevent certain parties from ever contacting him or her via any method.
Practical Examples and Case Studies
The application of no soliciting sign laws can vary significantly based on the jurisdiction and context. Here are a few real-life examples.
Case Study 1: Commercial Establishment in Florida
In 1996, a liquor store in Homestead, Florida posted signs on its premises reading "No Solicitors." A few months later, a shopper for a company called Cowen purchased liquor at the store and handed out brochures for the company inside the store. The liquor store owner asked him to stop, citing the posted no soliciting signs. When the solicitor refused, the liquor store owner called the police. The solicitor filed a lawsuit against the store under federal civil rights law, claiming that carrying his products into the store was protected under the First Amendment. The court agreed with the liquor store owner, finding that he had the right to exclude solicitors from his store, and that restricting access to his business was not against public policy.
Outcome: Victory for property owner
Case Study 2: Residential Community in Pennsylvania
In 1993, the residents of a community in Pennsylvania won a court case against a newspaper publisher regarding a no soliciting sign that they had posted. They had distributed a brochure to all the houses printed with an example "no soliciting" sign and a statement indicating that the sign was not a demand , but a request for business people not to knock on their doors between the hours of 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. The newspaper publisher sued, claiming that it had a First Amendment right to door-to-door solicitation. The court ruled for the residential community, saying the publishers had not offered any evidence that the community’s no soliciting sign harmed free speech. Furthermore, the court said, the newspapers made no effort to seek a rapport with the residents before using the sign as an excuse to enter the neighborhood.
Outcome: Victory for property owner
Case Study 3: Apartment Complex in California
A 2003 case in California shed light on the application and limitations of no soliciting signs. In this case, an apartment complex had a posted no soliciting sign, but allowed certain businesses to solicit tenants at their doors, such as flower deliveries, pizza deliveries, and a local newspaper. A Christian ministry that ran a Bible-study program for women tried to distribute a flyer to the apartments, but the property manager told them that they could not come onto the property to distribute their materials. The Bible-study program sued. The California Court of Appeal held that apartment residents had a First Amendment right to door-to-door distribution of literature, and that the complex could not object to certain types of literature while allowing other types.
Outcome: Victory for property owner