Loz

Good grief - I hate going around E&C in a car. If you go around it on a bike when there is a perfectly good alternative then you're mad. It's all very well asking for car drivers to look out for bikes more, but if you aren't willing to look after yourself...

Good point, Gimme. The Rosendale would be a good choice.

Nick, Good start. Being upfront and saying you own the shop is appreciated round here - rather than try and pretend that you've "just discovered a great new shop" like some others have tried on here. You obviously did your homework before posting! And good luck for the new business!

Actually, the one time I went to the Lodge (upstairs at the EDT) it was rather pleasant as well.

I think the best for two-person ambience is Le Chardon. Franklins has the best food, but the restaurant itself is a bit bare.

So, we have Vitty Floris, Kalamity Kel, Sexy Sal and Sweetgirl. One more and I think we can actually reform the Spice Girls...

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Allow a good hour or so waiting at the bus stop. An hour, Jeremy? Optimist... Early evening 37 services on the weekend are, frankly, a disgrace.

I don't get travel sick (unless I'm on a boat and it's *really* swaying). I used to as a kid, but I was so determined to read my books in the car I beat it by sheer pigheadedness. Though, strangely, playing games like Doom, etc, make me feel something akin to travel sick. Back on subject, GoogleMaps reckons that ED Station to Trafalgar Sq is 3.9 miles. Since Matt can run like the wind and leap tall commuters in a single bound, I suspect just legging it would be the fastest for him. (That, it's worth pointing out, won't work for me. I think I can actually walk faster than I run.)

Oh, Matt would win, Sophie - I don't deny that. But I would arrive relaxed and with morning paper fully read. And a quid or two in my pocket. Sneaky, Matt - finding one of the few express trains of the morning. As Jeremy said, a big sprint through London Bridge and a even bigger sprint to get to the square in 2 mins might get you there. But, I grudgingly admit it is theoretically possible.

25 mins? Easily? I'd be willing to bet you you cannot get from ED to Trafalgar Square by that route in 25 minutes, especially in the morning rush hour. ED/LB trains in the morning take minimum 15 minutes, the LB/CC train 10 mins, leaving you zero time to get from platform 16 to platform 6, wait for a train (assuming you can squeeze onto the first one available) and walk from CC to Traf Sq. Forty minutes is a more realistic time for that journey. My description is based on my known journey times, bus stop to work doorstep on the Mall side at Traf Sq. I did it two to three times a week and it took between 50 minutes to an hour. Yes, the bus sometimes takes longer due to traffic, but train holdups sitting outside London Bridge for no apparent reason are hardly a rarity. Nor are cancelled trains. And you can get there and back for 2 quid on Oystercard prepay - that's ?10 a week. But hey, if you want to fork out ?25.80 a week to buy a travelcard for the privilege of getting to work 10 minutes earlier... I used to be bus-phobic too until my other half started using them. Now I take them as a preference. Saves me a fortune.

I worked in Trafalgar Sq for a while during the year and the 176 was, to me, the cheapest and best route and I live not far from ED station - in fact I use the bus stop at the station. The 12 is almost as good (especially now the Tamils have gone), but it does take a bit longer and it involved a change at E&C for me to get it. Nothing wrong with the train route, it takes a similar time but it's more expensive and I like the idea of 50 mins to myself reading the paper/doing a bit of work, rather than train/change/train. You might stand to start with, but you always get a seat when the bus gets to Denmark Hill. Sean's right - get off as soon as you pass the Savoy and walk - Bedford St stop IIRC. The last bit past Charing Cross is sloooow.

The barbers are on the site of the old sports shop.

Can we redirect the 63 past ED station as well? That'd be rather handy... (only partially serious suggestion!)

They're hoping to move somewhere bigger? What about the old Thai Palace across the road! That's been empty for a couple of years now.

Good grief. I thought we'd sorted this out last time... Amelie is correct (notwithstanding the excellent advice from Penguin68) - the pedestrian has right of way on a zebra crossing. If you are approaching a zebra crossing and a pedestrian looks like they want to cross you must give them the right of way. If you step out in front of a moving car at a zebra crossing the driver will be at fault. Mark is partially correct. At a junction, if they have begun to cross, the driver must give way to the pedestrian. Otherwise, if you step out in front of a moving car then legally you will be in the wrong. And dead.

Sorry to hear that Bic. Was that 6.40 am or pm? Council workmen "working" outside of 10am to 4.30pm? Suspicious all on its own!

Are you near ED station by any chance? I've had a couple of people ringing the doorbell in the last day or so. I don't bother answering as I can see from the upstairs window that they are selling something. (Shoulder bag, clipboard, name badge). Persistent buggers, too. They come around a couple of times in the day, seeing if you are back.

HAL9000 - this is an open, public internet forum. Steph has the right to reply and clarify any time she wants to. Rosie is correct: taking what Steph said at anything other than face value is jumping to conclusions. Taking Steph at her word is not, and posters are entitled to reply to something Steph (or anyone) wrote. It is then up to Steph to clarify, should she feel she has been misconstrued. I mean, do you seek further clarification before replying to anyone here?

Rosie is spot on. Internet forums, like email, is a form of communication where the words you choose to use mean everything. You can't, in most cases, know more about the person behind the keyboard. I've re-read Steph's post and I've re-read my post. Steph came across very badly from the words she used and missus, for whatever reason, has misread and misquoted what Steph said. What Steph wrote was appalling and my response to her still holds.

It's printed on the card.

So Steph is saying that, if someone took a photo of her child without her permission, it would be in the child's best interest to have it's father banged up for a few months and left with a criminal record. This is now considered 'good parenting'. Words fail me.

I can assure you it happens many, many times every day. If not hundreds of times. And you have no idea who is on the other side of those cameras...

I think we should all just stay indoors and live out our lives in terror and suspicion. You can't be too careful, you know.

You are confusing the actual law vs what the police do, Marmora Man!

I don't want to seem like I'm also jumping on your original post jenren, as you've copped it a bit, but it's worth pointing out one fallacy: UK law says that you have no rights over your, or your child's, image if it is taken in a public place. Photographers are free to use their photographs of people taken in public places as they wish - including for commercial gain. There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.