UKC

Public Toilet running costs

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Slackboot 26 Apr 2023

In general the local council used to look after public toilets.. My gran used to earn money cleaning them, so I have a family connection and interest in their upkeep.

Because of 'austerity' and cutbacks many public toilets have closed. Some of the ones now open are ' managed ' by private companies.

To my mind it is an essential service that council's should provide. It should be a basic human right to have access to a public toilet in a modern society where you can get into trouble for doing the necessary elsewhere when caught short. And it is not so easy for women! (I dont mind paying more council tax for toilets that are free at point of use)

With this in mind and the begrudged acceptance that it looks like private management of public toilets is increasing can someone tell me why it costs £93,000 per annum to look after the small one in Grasmere? at a cost of 50p every time you need to go. ( That is the figure on the sign that tries to explain the costs)

The answer of course will be profits for the cleaning company but I don't like it! 

Post edited at 20:38
6
 The New NickB 26 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

They are massively expensive to maintain, whoever looks after them. Put them in a city centre and you can double the costs.

 Ridge 26 Apr 2023
In reply to The New NickB:

> They are massively expensive to maintain, whoever looks after them. Put them in a city centre and you can double the costs.

Agreed. The council couldn't afford to maintain the public toilets at a very small seaside village near me, so volunteers try and look after it. It's thousands a year in consumables and repairs/unblocking as it gets trashed pretty much every week or two. Chuck in a minimum wage salary and employers NI, a van, PPE, admin etc on top of that and you'd hit something close to that £90k for Grasmere.

Post edited at 21:00
 CantClimbTom 26 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

They may be expensive but it can also be expensive not to have them. As an example of idiocy my local authority have 2 public recycling centres (tips) to cover nearly ~300,000 people but they relatively recently became very selective about what they won't accept, following that, fly tipping because a major cost for the council.

In a similar vein if they save £90k closing the toilets at Grasmere, what would be the cost of the impact on the council and local community for the problems resulting from not having one?

 Lankyman 26 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

> Because of 'austerity' and cutbacks many public toilets have closed. Some of the ones now open are ' managed ' by private companies.

It's a new cottage industry

 Forest Dump 26 Apr 2023
In reply to CantClimbTom:

Sadly, full cost accountancy ain't how decisions are made..

I know of a commmuntu group that took on some toilets at a popular destination, the only way they could make it work was by installing solar & EV charge points as a revenue generator

Lack of public toilets is a local politics ssue where I am, especially since the seasonal, expensive portaloos have been removed 

 Ridge 26 Apr 2023
In reply to CantClimbTom:

> They may be expensive but it can also be expensive not to have them. As an example of idiocy my local authority have 2 public recycling centres (tips) to cover nearly ~300,000 people but they relatively recently became very selective about what they won't accept, following that, fly tipping because a major cost for the council.

That may be down to the Environment Agency, not the council.

> In a similar vein if they save £90k closing the toilets at Grasmere, what would be the cost of the impact on the council and local community for the problems resulting from not having one?

That implies the local council have £90k to spend after cuts to their budget.

OP Slackboot 26 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

Just in the interests of accuracy I think the toilets I am ranting about are in Ambleside and not Grasmere. Apologies.

OP Slackboot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to The New NickB:

> They are massively expensive to maintain, whoever looks after them. Put them in a city centre and you can double the costs.

I appreciate that and am really just lamenting the changes that are and have taken place in our society. These things are felt more by older people I think as they can remember different times when they are looking through the 'rose tinted' specs that you can't get from the NHS any more.

 ExiledScot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

Perhaps there needs to be rules on certainly all cafes having toilets and not using the public toilet around the corner etc, but also all bigger shops over a given SqM. They'll pay indirectly anyway as if the council funds them, the cost will end up on local rates bills eventually. I think it's appalling how hard it can be to find toilets these days, even harder for decent baby changing facilities, but millions are wasted on pet projects, or stupid stuff like fireworks displays. 

1
 Theho 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Ridge:

Cost of employing someone on minimum wage including pension and national insurance is £17,756* (full time). Even if you buy a new van and equipment each year, I struggle to see where the £93k comes from. If the cost of repairing it every time it gets trashed is close to that, you could hire a few full time bouncers to look after it and still break even. However, I'm unsure about how much 'toilet admin' costs in today's world. I'm considering a career change.

* Just realised this was from 2019 so this needs upping a bit

Post edited at 07:56
10
 henwardian 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

> With this in mind and the begrudged acceptance that it looks like private management of public toilets is increasing can someone tell me why it costs £93,000 per annum to look after the small one in Grasmere? at a cost of 50p every time you need to go. ( That is the figure on the sign that tries to explain the costs)

> The answer of course will be profits for the cleaning company but I don't like it! 

If you have a bit of time on your hands (something which is perhaps suggested by starting this thread ), you could put in a freedom of information request for a breakdown of what that £93k is made up of. Would be quite interesting to see how the costs break down.

In the absence of that, I'll theorise a possible breakdown:

£5k - toilet paper.

£1k - cleaning supplies.

£3k - capital depreciation of capital cleaning items.

£9k - pretax profit - a 10% profit seems like the lowest you could reasonably be expecting a private company to take on an enterprise like this.

£40k - true cost of two part-time cleaners to clean twice a day every day (inc NI, holidays, etc. etc.).

£5k - electricity, this is a massive stab in the dark and might be a hugely lowball estimate. Do they have hot water taps? Or only cold ones?

£?k repairs every time something breaks... Anyone who has ever been to a public toilet knows that there is absolutely always a percentage of toilet roll dispensers, door locks (usually 100% for locks actually!), taps, toilets, toilet seats, etc. etc. etc. that are broken. It wouldn't surprise me to find that parts + workmanship cost £20k or more to keep most things in mostly working order most of the time.

Then you need a rainy day fund for repairs to the building itself. If you suddenly need to replace the roof for £20k, you are going to need to have put some money aside for one-off expenses like this.

If there is one thing I've learned from running a small business, it's that the "thing" you suddenly need to buy or pay is always £1k or more and if you weren't actually the person in the business, you would have no idea that that thing could ever possibly even be an expense.

1
 henwardian 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Theho:

> Cost of employing someone on minimum wage including pension and national insurance is £17,756* (full time). 

> * Just realised this was from 2019 so this needs upping a bit

You are mixing up the cost of employing someone with the salary that that person is paid. The two are not the same thing, typically the cost of employing someone = 1.7 times the salary of that person.

4
 henwardian 27 Apr 2023
In reply to ExiledScot:

> I think it's appalling how hard it can be to find toilets these days, even harder for decent baby changing facilities,

Agreed. I do think these things should be properly funded.

However:

> but millions are wasted on pet projects, or stupid stuff like fireworks displays. 

I'm always wary of relativistic arguments like this. On the thin end of the wedge, it starts to be things like "why do we bother funding museums?" but further down, it turns into "who cares if the roads have loads of potholes and nobody can drive faster than 20mph, saving lives with the NHS is more important" or "lets get rid of the army, after all, it's just wasted money when there just isn't any way we can see the UK getting invaded".

Many of the things that seem frivolous, or at least of lesser importance do, nevertheless feed into our society as a whole. Bad roads mean poor transport which hinders economic productivity when means less taxes to spend on the NHS. No cultural things means a big hit for the tourism industry, among other things. Even something like a fireworks display is a celebration for the people watching - celebrations make people happy, happy people are more productive and, well, it's nicer to live in a happy society at the end of the day!

I think that considering each expenditure on it's own merits is a better way of making these decisions.

1
 pasbury 27 Apr 2023
In reply to The New NickB:

> They are massively expensive to maintain, whoever looks after them. Put them in a city centre and you can double the costs.

I could personally do it for a shit load less than £93,000 including water rates and electricity bills. I happily would too for that amount and you'd have the cleanest khazi for miles around.

9
 Martin W 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

> I appreciate that and am really just lamenting the changes that are and have taken place in our society.

Those changes, especially things like 'austerity' and continuing cuts to LA budgets (while at the same time constraining their ability to raise the necessary money to fund even their statutory requirements adequately through Council Tax) have come about because the general populace has persistently voted in governments which have promoted and pursued precisely those policies.  There seem to be plenty of people about who really don't seem to 'get' that public services have to be funded out of the public purse even when those services are delivered by private companies.  Either that, or they just don't care that public services are being ground into dust and would actually prefer to live in an impoverished sh!thole of a country (while roundly declaring that it should be made "Great" again*) so long as they don't have to pay a penny more in tax.

> These things are felt more by older people I think as they can remember different times when they are looking through the 'rose tinted' specs that you can't get from the NHS any more.

Ironically, though, it's precisely that demographic that persists in supporting at the ballot box precisely those parties with overt austerity/budget cutting/small government policies.

How long before this thread ends up in the politics forum, I wonder...

* While apparently being unaware that the "Great" in Great Britain is, in origin, a geographical term rather than a comment on the standing of the nation in the world.

2
 Sam Beaton 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Martin W:

> Those changes, especially things like 'austerity' and continuing cuts to LA budgets (while at the same time constraining their ability to raise the necessary money to fund even their statutory requirements adequately through Council Tax) have come about because the general populace has persistently voted in governments which have promoted and pursued precisely those policies.  There seem to be plenty of people about who really don't seem to 'get' that public services have to be funded out of the public purse even when those services are delivered by private companies.  Either that, or they just don't care that public services are being ground into dust and would actually prefer to live in an impoverished sh!thole of a country (while roundly declaring that it should be made "Great" again*) so long as they don't have to pay a penny more in tax.

> Ironically, though, it's precisely that demographic that persists in supporting at the ballot box precisely those parties with overt austerity/budget cutting/small government policies.

This

2
 ExiledScot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to henwardian:

Celebrations... have a bonfire to celebrate burning a Catholic, but skip the fire works and save the money for something that 99.9% of population agree is lacking. Everyone is happy and not bursting then. 

4
 Bottom Clinger 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

When I’m in Grasmere I take advantage of the great outdoors and take a dump up Looughrigg. 

 Bottom Clinger 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Bottom Clinger:

> When I’m in Grasmere I take advantage of the great outdoors and take a dump up Looughrigg. 

Apart from when I’m off to Keswick when I have a toilet stop at the top of Dumpmail Raise

 earlsdonwhu 27 Apr 2023
In reply to ExiledScot:

I've seen this in Cornwall... effectively, some local cafes/ restaurants/ pubs are given a subsidy so that anyone can use their loos whether they are customers or not. 

 Alkis 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Ridge:

> That may be down to the Environment Agency, not the council.

It may be, but it usually isn't. For instance, I just moved from Broxtowe council to Nottingham City Council, having moved pretty much exactly a mile down the road. The Nottingham tip takes a lot less stuff. No plasterboard is one example, or rather they charge 20 quid for a small bag of plasterboard. They are quite open about it, they state they will not be accepting anything that's not a legal requirement for them to accept.

 henwardian 27 Apr 2023
In reply to ExiledScot:

> Celebrations... have a bonfire to celebrate burning a Catholic, but skip the fire works and save the money for something that 99.9% of population agree is lacking. Everyone is happy and not bursting then. 

I would agree that firework displays are about as profligate a use of money and resources as you could imagine and I'd have no problem removing them from public expenditure. But I'd make that judgement on their own merits (or lack thereof) rather than by comparison.

 ExiledScot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to henwardian:

> I would agree that firework displays are about as profligate a use of money and resources as you could imagine and I'd have no problem removing them from public expenditure. But I'd make that judgement on their own merits (or lack thereof) rather than by comparison.

Easy, councils don't fund them and or charge an entry fee and see how many pay, I'd speculate most will just stand outside the paid for zone to watch good money go up in smoke. 

 henwardian 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Alkis:

> It may be, but it usually isn't. For instance, I just moved from Broxtowe council to Nottingham City Council, having moved pretty much exactly a mile down the road. The Nottingham tip takes a lot less stuff. No plasterboard is one example, or rather they charge 20 quid for a small bag of plasterboard. They are quite open about it, they state they will not be accepting anything that's not a legal requirement for them to accept.

This sort of incentivising fly tipping is something that I just don't understand. There is such an obvious connection between refusing to take waste and people dumping the waste elsewhere.

Obviously you don't want a building company to be taking a load of construction waste in every single day rather than paying for their own skip on the site but the pretty obvious way to deal with this is just to have a number-plate reader at the dump entry that stores all the data in a database and alerts the staff when a vehicle is coming in far too often, then you can decide on/apply sanctions from there. 

 Ridge 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Alkis:

 >> That may be down to the Environment Agency, not the council.

> It may be, but it usually isn't. For instance, I just moved from Broxtowe council to Nottingham City Council, having moved pretty much exactly a mile down the road. The Nottingham tip takes a lot less stuff. No plasterboard is one example, or rather they charge 20 quid for a small bag of plasterboard. They are quite open about it, they state they will not be accepting anything that's not a legal requirement for them to accept.

They won't take plasterboard because the EA have banned the disposal of plasterboard to landfill due to hydrogen sulphide emissions from the gypsum. Therefore it costs more to dispose of than household waste

Pain in the arse if you're doing DIY, but alternatively why should the taxpayer subsidise cash-in-hand builders (the main disposers of plasterboad to council tips and lay-bys) who aren't using the licensed trade waste disposal routes that legitimate builders have to pay to use?

1
 ExiledScot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to earlsdonwhu:

> I've seen this in Cornwall... effectively, some local cafes/ restaurants/ pubs are given a subsidy so that anyone can use their loos whether they are customers or not. 

I think if there were toilets in cafes over say 25 seats, shops over X sqm, all car parks over maybe 50 slots (note. all random numbers I've just thrown in) then in any high street, tourist spot etc there should be facilities to meet demand. Toileting isn't infinite, if there are sufficient options then there won't be queues and no one location has to carry all the burden of cost. 

My father now has a stoma bag and has suddenly become acutely aware of how few toilets there are and how dirty most are too, to the point where it's a priority of planning where to go (in all respects!).

Post edited at 15:21
 Ridge 27 Apr 2023
In reply to pasbury:

> I could personally do it for a shit load less than £93,000 including water rates and electricity bills. I happily would too for that amount and you'd have the cleanest khazi for miles around.

See henwardians post explaing how there's a world of difference between providing reliable public services and some random bloke spraying a bit of Poundshop bog cleaner about every now and then.

 Alkis 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Ridge:

> Pain in the arse if you're doing DIY, but alternatively why should the taxpayer subsidise cash-in-hand builders (the main disposers of plasterboad to council tips and lay-bys) who aren't using the licensed trade waste disposal routes that legitimate builders have to pay to use?

They are not allowed to anyway, so all it does is penalise residents, and that doesn't change that out of two councils with the highest council tax in the entire country, one accepts it and one charges £20 quid for one bag with a maximum allowance of one bag. Plasterboard was one example. it's not the only thing they don't accept, and they have strict limits on how many times you can turn up etc. All in all, it results in flytipping.

Edit: Actually, they've reduced their prices massively. It's now 8 quid per 25kg, which is a lot more reasonable.

Post edited at 15:31
 Andypeak 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Alkis:

Until very recently Nottingham City would actually come and collect items from your door step for free in an attempt to reduce fly tipping. It would be interesting to see how much this has increased since the change

 The New NickB 27 Apr 2023
In reply to ExiledScot:

Witness the shitstorm when firework displays are cancelled to save money.

Like toilets of course, such things often have wider economic benefits.

Post edited at 16:47
1
In reply to Ridge:

> Pain in the arse if you're doing DIY, but alternatively why should the taxpayer subsidise cash-in-hand builders (the main disposers of plasterboad to council tips and lay-bys) who aren't using the licensed trade waste disposal routes that legitimate builders have to pay to use?

Because otherwise it gets fly tipped and the taxpayer gets to clean it up anyway.

A great idea would be if people in each area all agreed on one place for everyone to do the fly tipping of stuff the council are pains in the arse about or charge money for disposing of, so the council knew where they'd need to clean up, and would only have to go to the one place. It would never need reporting, they could just go there regularly and sort it, so it would be loads cheaper for them. Could even pick somewhere easy and convenient for all parties. Maybe people would even sort it into different piles if you asked nicely. Wonder if it's ever been considered..... It would need a snappy name, obviously. Any thoughts...?

2
 Theho 27 Apr 2023
In reply to pasbury:

Happy to go in halves with you. We can split the £40k salary for the 3.5 hours per week contract. We can also split the £2.5k toilet roll profit too and errr the pre-tax profit. I'm not sure how much the parfum d'urine costs but we might be able to undercut that.

I just can't stop thinking about the comparison to the free toilets all over the Chamonix Valley.

 Derry 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

Haven't read the full thread, but my 2 pee (hehe) worth; 

We've got public toilets where I work and they are an enormous expense to keep open just for 8 hours a day. The horrific things the cleaners have to go through means they are grossly underpaid for what they're doing and having to experience. We had some school kids try to flush their field studies booklet down the loos yesterday causing all the cubicles to flood and the local (expensive) plumber to be called out. (side-note - if you're flushing school work down the toilet; don't leave your name and school name on the paper.... People like me like to inform the school).

Anyway beside that, for every piece of toilet paper, flush, bit of liquid soap, hand drying etc etc it really does add up. £93k does seem a lot. But our toilets definitely top about £4-5k a month!

 pasbury 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Ridge:

Well yes I was being glib and have subsequently spent far too much time thinking about toilets this afternoon. I still think private providers are charging more than they should. If be surprised if they had any capex to deal with for buildings etc as I'm pretty sure they won't own the bricks and mortar. At least I've never seen any public bogs on the market as going concerns.

 ExiledScot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to The New NickB:

> Witness the shitstorm when firework displays are cancelled to save money.

> Like toilets of course, such things often have wider economic benefits.

Guess vets make a few quid selling drugs for people to calm their pets, police and retained fire crews earn a few bob extra because of firework use, fires etc.. might occupy a few A&E staff too. Beneficial, I'm not so certain. 

 IainL 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

The councils don’t pick up the fly tipping. The cost of cleaning it up is the responsibility of the landowner where the stuff is dumped. 

 Maggot 27 Apr 2023
In reply to IainL:

> The councils don’t pick up the fly tipping. The cost of cleaning it up is the responsibility of the landowner where the stuff is dumped. 

Explain this then : For these large fly-tipping incidents, the cost of clearance to local authorities in England in 2020/21 was £11.6 million

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/fly-tipping-in-england/fly-tipping...

1
 The New NickB 27 Apr 2023
In reply to IainL:

> The councils don’t pick up the fly tipping. The cost of cleaning it up is the responsibility of the landowner where the stuff is dumped. 

Of course in many cases, the local authority is the land owner.

 Dave the Rave 27 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

Shits in the shape of gingerbread men are notoriously difficult to flush.

 ExiledScot 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Maggot:

> Explain this then : For these large fly-tipping incidents, the cost of clearance to local authorities in England in 2020/21 was ....

Laybys, verges, car parks, waste ground, country lanes etc... 

 dread-i 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Andypeak:

> Until very recently Nottingham City would actually come and collect items from your door step for free in an attempt to reduce fly tipping. It would be interesting to see how much this has increased since the change

When I lived in Manchester, a few years ago, they would do that. Just down the road in Trafford, they would come out and stick 'Envirocrime' stickers on any fly tipping. They would knock door to door. Leave it a week or two. Then come and take it away anyway.

I can understand the idea of trying to track down and prosecute fly tippers, but they seem to be making the problem worse. They will remove it anyway. So why not do that before bags of crap get ripped open. Or others see a pile of trash and add to it. 

To the point above about taking plaster board to the tip. Inert waste such as bricks, also requires a permit before you can dump it.

 wercat 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Bottom Clinger:

You can Easedale your needs in a Tarn, or do Allcock if you like

I link the growth in wild "swimming" with the shortage of free toilets, lots of older people "swimming" ...

Personally I keep an inventory of secluded trees when visiting tourist areas

Post edited at 08:43
OP Slackboot 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Forest Dump:

Very informative. In particular I like the 'Comments' section where the public respond to the article. Some very articulate and interesting comments much superior to the comments people leave in the local papers where I live.

 I can tell by your 'handle' that this is something close to your heart too! ☺

 Forest Dump 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

The below the line comments were unusually coherent!

 Jenny C 28 Apr 2023
In reply to ExiledScot:

> Perhaps there needs to be rules on certainly all cafes having toilets and not using the public toilet around the corner etc, but also all bigger shops over a given SqM......

I'm in total agreement regarding larger shops behind required to provide public facilities, my suggestion would be those large enough to be affected by Sunday Trading Laws. Also all cafes that provide eat-in (or outside seating) rather than being exclusively takeaway.

Thinking back to my childhood, many public toilets were very grotty with no paper or electric lights, but were functional and most importantly open 24/7. Taking three facilities in Sheffield - Rivellin Valley was upgraded but is now closed, Forge Dam has been upgraded and now has restricted opening and Ecclesall Tram Terminus is now permanently closed.

 jimtitt 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Jenny C:

Why on earth should a commercial enterprise be responsible for the bowel or bladder movements of casual passers-by?

7
 Pedro50 28 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> Why on earth should a commercial enterprise be responsible for the bowel or bladder movements of casual passers-by?

I see your point, however it could be incentivised by a reduction in business rates or a council grant. 

1
 elsewhere 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Derry:

I would never have believed a toilet costs £93k pa or £4-5k a month.

Makes you wonder if it would be better & cheaper if permanently staffed like they often are on the continent.

And any excuse to talk cr#p on the internet.

Post edited at 18:03
 The New NickB 28 Apr 2023
In reply to elsewhere:

I have permanently staffed public toilets in my building at work (external entrance). They cost a lot more that £93k a year to operate.

 flatlandrich 28 Apr 2023
In reply to henwardian:

> In the absence of that, I'll theorise a possible breakdown:

> £5k - toilet paper.

> £1k - cleaning supplies.

> £3k - capital depreciation of capital cleaning items.

> £9k - pretax profit - a 10% profit seems like the lowest you could reasonably be expecting a private company to take on an enterprise like this.

> £40k - true cost of two part-time cleaners to clean twice a day every day (inc NI, holidays, etc. etc.).

> £5k - electricity, this is a massive stab in the dark and might be a hugely lowball estimate. Do they have hot water taps? Or only cold ones?

> £?k repairs every time something breaks... Anyone who has ever been to a public toilet knows that there is absolutely always a percentage of toilet roll dispensers, door locks (usually 100% for locks actually!), taps, toilets, toilet seats, etc. etc. etc. that are broken. It wouldn't surprise me to find that parts + workmanship cost £20k or more to keep most things in mostly working order most of the time.

> Then you need a rainy day fund for repairs to the building itself. If you suddenly need to replace the roof for £20k, you are going to need to have put some money aside for one-off expenses like this.

A couple of more ideas to add to that list, although no idea how much they would cost.

The cost of the incoming fresh water and the out going waste must add up to quite a sizeable chunk over the course of a year.

I'm not familiar with that toilet block but if it's not on council land there could be some annual ground rent/rates included in that figure as well. 

 flatlandrich 28 Apr 2023
In reply to henwardian:

> This sort of incentivising fly tipping is something that I just don't understand. There is such an obvious connection between refusing to take waste and people dumping the waste elsewhere.

> Obviously you don't want a building company to be taking a load of construction waste in every single day rather than paying for their own skip on the site but the pretty obvious way to deal with this is just to have a number-plate reader at the dump entry that stores all the data in a database and alerts the staff when a vehicle is coming in far too often, then you can decide on/apply sanctions from there. 

Some interesting comments on here about local tip sites and it makes me appreciate my local ones. They'll take just about anything with a few reasonable exceptions (food waste, asbestos, etc) and charge a minimal amount for the likes of plasterboard and rubble.

They'll also except trade waste from licensed carries for, what I consider, very reasonable fees. You book an appointment on line, are checked in on arrival, and pay a fee depending on what and how much you are bringing in. You then receive the necessary paperwork. It's a great way to dispose of small amounts of business waste and I'm sure local fly tipping is down since it was introduced about 5 years ago. 

 Jenny C 28 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

Supermarkets and certain department stores manage to provide customer toilets, arguably it increases sales as the causal passer by may just see something they like and then impulse buy.

I can think of several times where I've cut a shopping trip short due to lack of toilet provision, and of where the presence of toilets has led to me staying in-store longer and therefore spending more.

 jimtitt 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Jenny C:

> Supermarkets and certain department stores manage to provide customer toilets, arguably it increases sales as the causal passer by may just see something they like and then impulse buy.

> I can think of several times where I've cut a shopping trip short due to lack of toilet provision, and of where the presence of toilets has led to me staying in-store longer and therefore spending more.

They can do anything they want, you want them to be forced to do what you would like. 

11
 profitofdoom 28 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> Why on earth should a commercial enterprise be responsible for the bowel or bladder movements of casual passers-by?

They are not 'casual passers-by', they are most often customers who may spend more money the longer they stay in store (more likely in a place with toilets).The customers may have children and may visit places with toilets more often and be thankful to the management, a good outcome for the store

2
 Rob Exile Ward 28 Apr 2023
In reply to profitofdoom:

What's intriguing about this topic is that it disproportionately affects those who supposedly currently have economic and political clout - baby boomers.

FWIW toilet provision is a factor in choice of destinations, and on that basis e.g. Kendal good, Ambleside rubbish.

 JimR 28 Apr 2023
In reply to Slackboot:

Since I was a toddler until my mid 50s my life was regulated by the availability of loos as I suffered from sudden urgent calls of nature. I’m sure I’m not the only one with this condition where the availability of loos is essential for quality of life. In my 50s my life was transformed when a consultant told me cut out gluten and dairy. Imho the easy availability of loos is not just a matter of convenience [sic] but is absolutely essential for  some people if they wish to go out.

 sbc23 28 Apr 2023

In reply to Slackboot:

I’d propose a funding model where the council pay the private provider 10p or 50p or whatever it needs to be whenever a person uses the toilets and is satisfied by its upkeep and cleanliness. If they’re not, they don’t get paid for that user. 

I have no problem whatsoever with private company’s ingenuity and the efficiency being used, provided the contracts are setup in such a way that only good performance is rewarded.

I suspect this isn’t the case here. The bulk of the consumption and abuse will be concentrated in about 100days a year. Even an idiot could run a shithouse to a mediocre standard for a grand a day. 

3
 Maggot 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> Why on earth should a commercial enterprise be responsible for the bowel or bladder movements of casual passers-by?

Because it generates income.

There's a garage 2 or 3 miles off the M6 where I know I can get a slash and fuel 30p per litre less than the motorway services. 

2
 jimtitt 29 Apr 2023
In reply to profitofdoom:

> They are not 'casual passers-by', they are most often customers who may spend more money the longer they stay in store (more likely in a place with toilets).The customers may have children and may visit places with toilets more often and be thankful to the management, a good outcome for the store

I am aware of the concept of customer toilets, my question is why should a business be forced to provide them when for example they sell non-food? It is the councils job to provide public services.

4
 JimR 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> I am aware of the concept of customer toilets, my question is why should a business be forced to provide them when for example they sell non-food? It is the councils job to provide public services.

One could argue it’s society’s responsibility to cater for society’s needs!

 Jenny C 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

Because across the country local councils are failing to provide for this basic human essential function and unless we want our streets to returen to being open sewers someone needs to fill the gap.

Shops bring people, people bring full bladders, if you open a large store you bring more people, often traveling further or visiting for longer and therefore should provide facilities. 

1
 The New NickB 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> They can do anything they want, you want them to be forced to do what you would like. 

No they can’t do anything they want. Supermarkets and shopping centres exist because we let them exist as part of a regulated system. Planning permission, licensing etc.

 ExiledScot 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> I am aware of the concept of customer toilets, my question is why should a business be forced to provide them when for example they sell non-food? It is the councils job to provide public services.

If I'm shopping for multiple items and I've got turtles head i either go in store, or hang the items secretly behind stuff on the wrong rail, disappear off down the street and usually return. Unless I've had to go half way across the world to the nearest big supermarket cafe in which case I may not. Toilets are part of customer service, I have no expectation of little stores having them, but big multi floor venues should, especially if they sell kids or baby clothes, as it's a given you'll need them!

 jimtitt 29 Apr 2023
In reply to Jenny C:

> Because across the country local councils are failing to provide for this basic human essential function and unless we want our streets to returen to being open sewers someone needs to fill the gap.

> Shops bring people, people bring full bladders, if you open a large store you bring more people, often traveling further or visiting for longer and therefore should provide facilities. 

So local councils (who are controlled by the public) fail to provide a service the private sector should be forced to do it?

7
 wercat 29 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

it isn't as simple as people bringing full bladders.  The many many pubs, hotels, tearoooms and fast food/offlicences/confectionery outlets in, say, Keswick, are profiting hugely from fastfilling the bladders of their customers and I think they should be contributing to local services.  Of course they already do this through local business "rates".

Post edited at 13:53
 jimtitt 29 Apr 2023
In reply to wercat:

Local councils have the power (since 1936) to require places selling food/beverages etc to have free toilets for their customers. Why Halfords for example should be required to operate toilets for the general public escapes me, especially since they no doubt contribute handsomely to the councils coffers already.

6
 The New NickB 30 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

Halfords would be a particularly poor example of the type of business that might be expected to provide toilets to the public and in some cases beyond their direct customers. Of course, you knew that. As you say, there are existing powers, which require certain businesses to provide free toilets for their customers. Most town and city centre appear to operate a mix of public and private provision, in the case of the public provision, often in public buildings such as libraries rather than standalone facilities. There are voluntary schemes in place in some places, where some of those business that are obliged to provide customer toilets make them available to the general public, these work well, but because they are voluntary can be patchy in their reach.

In Britain, one of the purposes of the planning system is ensure that communities benefit from the provision of development rights, which give businesses the opportunity to make money. Those benefits will include jobs, payment of business rates etc, but might also include contributions to local green spaces, public transport, or indeed toilets.

I work with a number of major property investors, who will happily contribute to making the locations of their businesses (major city centre in this case) nicer places to be, beyond business rates and planning obligations, because they recognise that it is actually good for business. I am working on a major public space regeneration scheme, where one of the issues that we will be addressing is toilet provision, we will be looking at a range of options, but a number of those, if not all will involve working closely with both public and private sector partners and may include public provision in private businesses.

1
 Fat Bumbly2 30 Apr 2023
In reply to Bottom Clinger:

Drop in in the mere and cut out the middle man

 Andy Hardy 30 Apr 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> I am aware of the concept of customer toilets, my question is why should a business be forced to provide them when for example they sell non-food? It is the councils job to provide public services.

And the easiest, most cost effective way for councils to provide toilets is to force someone else to do it.

 Bottom Clinger 30 Apr 2023
In reply to Fat Bumbly2:

My family inform me that Wordsworth, having eaten too much Grasmere Gingerbead, would drop a big floater off the bridge into the river Rothay and play a game of poo sticks. 

 Pingboy 30 Apr 2023
In reply to Ridge:

The Environment Agency have no powers to ban anything. The regulations they enforce come from the government.

What a recycling centre does or does not accept has absolutely nothing to do with the Environment Agency.

What they accept is driven by government regulation and whatever agreement the private company has with the local authority.

2
 Lankyman 01 May 2023
In reply to Bottom Clinger:

> My family inform me that Wordsworth, having eaten too much Grasmere Gingerbead, would drop a big floater off the bridge into the river Rothay and play a game of poo sticks. 

Apparently this inspired him to create one of his masterpieces:

'I floated lonely as a turd that wanders down the river wide'.

His sister Dorothy edited it a bit before publishing.

 balmybaldwin 01 May 2023
In reply to henwardian:

When doing up my own kitchen, I needed to strip about 9m2 of tiles. In order to dispose of them in my household waste site (whilst being charged £4 a bag) I had to make 6 journeys over 3 days as each car was only allowed 1 bag of rubble a day and I've only got 2 cars in the household. Yet I can take as much old electronics, plastic and other crap as I like as often as I like. 

It really is not a surprise that people are fly tipping stuff all over

Post edited at 16:25
 Ridge 01 May 2023
In reply to Pingboy:

> The Environment Agency have no powers to ban anything. The regulations they enforce come from the government.

Thank you Mr Pedant.

> What a recycling centre does or does not accept has absolutely nothing to do with the Environment Agency.

What they accept has everything to do with their environmental permit for the storage, treatment and disposal of waste ( plus registration as a waste carrier for onward movement of waste). All issued and enforced by the Environment Agency.

> What they accept is driven by government regulation and whatever agreement the private company has with the local authority.

 Pingboy 01 May 2023
In reply to Ridge:

I wasn't trying to be pedantic, I just think it's misleading to blame the Environment Agency. It's like blaming the police for a law you don't agree with.

You are correct the Environment Agency does issue and enforce the relevant licenses, but the decision to restrict or charge for plasterboard is down to the landfill restrictions (national government) and the agreement between the waste disposal authority (local government) and the waste contractor based on cost of disposal.

In reply to jimtitt:

> It is the councils job to provide public services.

It's a long time since you lived in the UK, I suspect...

As mentioned upthread, council funding has repeatedly been cut, to the point where they cannot deliver services.

The answer is to fund local councils properly, but, hey, people don't seem to want to vote for that...

A lot of public toilet closures coincided with disabled access legislation; it would have been prohibitively expensive to comply, so facilities were simply shut; 'equal (in)opportunity', plus cost savings; everyone wins. Not...


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...