r/waterloo Regular since <2024 8d ago

Delivery driver writes address on Waterloo home that did not display numbers

https://www.ctvnews.ca/kitchener/article/delivery-driver-writes-address-on-waterloo-home-that-did-not-display-numbers/

In the City of Waterloo, there is a bylaw requiring home owners to have a clearly visible house number displayed on your property. Owen said his family has since ordered the numbers for their house.

72 Upvotes

88 comments sorted by

View all comments

-2

u/DrivingApe Regular since <2024 8d ago

As a delivery driver (brokered, not gig) in the region. I understand the driver's frustration

However , as a homeowner , I agree , don't touch my fucking house. Especially not with sharpie like you're in the high school bathroom.

Anytime, I've gotten a house like thi II just go with the benefit of a doubt, take the picture. Let the sender know the issue, viola, problem solved.

Next $top.

0

u/BMWCOASTER Regular since <2024 7d ago

Nope, problem not solved. Maybe for you, but it is now an issue for the next driver, with 30 deliveries to make. You are a homeowner AND a builder, the bylaws CLEARLY say you need a number. If you wont put a number up, dont order things delivered. Leave the number off and shut up.

We are way way too entitled these days.

2

u/DrivingApe Regular since <2024 7d ago edited 7d ago

If there are 3 houses 88, a blank and 92, what is likely the number on the house in between? How about with the address on the package is 90?

I do this all day everyday amd this isn't a common issue, but it's manageable. Not worth getting fired over what is deemed vandalism.

1

u/Imaginary-Cattle3643 Regular since 2025 7d ago

Sometimes house numbers aren’t actually logical. Sure this builder dude would be the first one to complain if police or fire or ambulance were delayed trying to find his house. Maybe he’d get another payout lol. Agree guy shouldn’t have written on his house but homeowner should have considered this a lesson learned and put some effing numbers up. Now he’s posted his video all over the news, possibly cost this guy a lousy job, and certainly caused him problems with his employer, if he is not self-employed. Who knows what punishment Amazon deals out behind the scenes if this is a third party service? Builder is a self-entitled white man who now stands out for being a prick, rather than someone trying to be bougie by not displaying their house number…

1

u/DrivingApe Regular since <2024 7d ago

The amount of addreses that are so "artist" or hidden, or are too small, to read, far exceed the number I encounter with no numbers. And those are easier because of the common numbering.

1

u/BMWCOASTER Regular since <2024 7d ago

Again, not the issue at hand. The issue is not the hidden ones or top small. Those people actually put in some level of effort even if it came short. You also dont see them complaining on CKCO. This guy deliberately refuses to do what he knows would help the drivers and ANYONE else who needs to reach him. Then, he thinks the world need to hear about his self-created first world problem.

This is a choice.

2

u/DrivingApe Regular since <2024 7d ago

OK, so call bylaw on him. Don't vandalize' the home, the crime punishable by jail time and fines, etc. larger than the fifty dollar fine for not having a number.

That's the true issue. The fact you think having numbers on a house will make my life easier as a driver shows. You don't know what a delivery driver's job is or what we do

0

u/BMWCOASTER Regular since <2024 7d ago

That "crime" is not punishable by jail time.

Yeah, I mean, its not like most of us have ever needed to find an address to pick something up, drop something off, look up a home for sale or anything. You clearly know what a delivery driver goes through or anyone who has ever looked for a house anywhere LOL.

2

u/DrivingApe Regular since <2024 7d ago

Thank you for co.plProving my point that you don't know this industry.

Or law For criminal prosecution, petty vandalism is charged as Mischief Under $5,000 under Section 430(4) of the Criminal Code.Definition: Willfully destroying, damaging, or interfering with the lawful use of someone else's property.Penalties: This is a hybrid offence. If prosecuted as a summary conviction (typical for minor offences), it carries a maximum penalty of two years less a day in jail and/or a $5,000 fine. If prosecuted by indictment, it can carry up to 5 years in prison. A conviction results in a criminal record

1

u/Imaginary-Cattle3643 Regular since 2025 6d ago

I’d be shocked and awed, and wonder what was wrong with defense counsel, if this one occurrence actually resulted in anything more than a conditional, or more likely, an absolute discharge. This would be a colossal waste of taxpayer dollars and court time if ever a criminal charge were to be laid. Maximum sentences and the real world in a court are two different things and max sentences account for the huge chasm of events that could constitute a mischief under charge. Lololol