Letter from the table: A sign, three visits, and no answer

To the Red Tape Council

I support the Small Business Impact Standard. I do not support it because every permit should be granted automatically, or because a municipality should ignore safety. I support it because an owner should be able to find out what is required, submit it once, and know when an answer is due.

In April, I applied for approval for a small fixed sign at premises I rent in Durban. I wanted people arriving there to find the entrance. It was not a freestanding roadside sign. The eThekwini Municipality’s outdoor-advertising controls were relevant, so I asked at the municipal office what approval I needed before arranging the work.

On 6 April, I was told to provide a sketch showing the sign’s size and position, a photograph of the frontage, and written permission from the property owner. I had permission, but not in the form the person at the counter expected. I went back to ask whether an email from the owner would do. I received a different answer: bring a signed letter. No one was rude. That is not the point. I needed to make another trip because I could not find one checklist that settled the question.

I returned on 9 April with the signed letter, sketch and photographs. I paid R420 to have the documents printed and prepared, and spent R186 on transport over the two visits. Those amounts were not a municipal application fee; they were costs I incurred to get the application ready and delivered. I submitted it and asked when I should expect a decision. I was not given a date I could rely on.

On 17 April, I was contacted and told that the sketch did not show the sign’s distance from the edge of the frontage. I added that measurement and returned the revised page on 21 April. I asked whether the application would now be treated as complete. I did not receive written confirmation. By 11 June, I still had no written decision or clear service-time estimate. I have not installed the sign.

The money matters, but so does the time around it. Each trip takes time away from work and requires planning. I had to keep the sign project open in my mind without knowing whether the next step was to wait, bring another document, or start again. I can absorb a few hundred rand more easily than a large business can absorb a whole administrative delay, but even a modest cost is not small when it is repeated and the outcome remains uncertain.

What I hear from owners around me is not that rules should disappear. They ask what form to use, which office is responsible, whether the file is complete, and when someone will respond. One owner may be trying to resolve a premises issue; another may be waiting on an approval tied to work they have already scheduled. The details differ. The common problem is being unable to plan around an unanswered application.

A one-stop digital process would have helped me if it meant one place to find the current checklist, upload the documents, and see whether anything was missing. “Digital” should not mean that an owner without reliable data or confidence using online forms is shut out. There should still be a clear in-person or assisted route, and the same requirements should apply whichever route a person uses.

Published service times would also change the experience. If the municipality said, for instance, that a complete application normally receives an answer within a specified number of working days, I could plan. If that time could not be met, I should receive a notice explaining why, what is still needed, and the new date. An unanswered file should not disappear into a system the applicant cannot see.

I support a “silence is consent” deadline, with careful limits. It should apply only after the responsible office confirms that an application is complete and only to permits the law allows to be handled that way. A missed deadline should have a real consequence, not simply a new automatic extension. Where structural safety, public access, or another serious risk is involved, there should be a stated exception and a named escalation route. The rule should be written plainly, so an owner knows before applying whether it applies.

The Red Tape Council is still gathering evidence and testing whether these are patterns, not just frustrations from one person. My experience is one file, not proof that every office or every permit works the same way. But it shows what the proposed standard is for: clear rules, a visible process, and a deadline that means something to the person waiting.