Sue

Hemingway Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ahh, so the Mrs keeps an eye on the bridge whilst > you're away BB? :)) :)) :))

Absolutely delighted to hear that new trees are being planted locally - thanks to all involved!

sjsl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ha ha brilliant news... Farage's website has been > hijacked https://thebrexitparty.com/ :)) :)) :))

:(

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Very sad to learn that. Nature can be a real > b*stard sometimes. On the other hand, nature seems to arrange things so that enough are born that some will hopefully be left. If all the tadpoles which hatched became mature frogs, we would be knee deep in frogs!

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Spotted a clutch of 7 newly hatched coot chicks on > the lake at Peckham Rye Park this morning If it's the same coot family, I could only see two with their parents yesterday :( Hope the heron hasn't had the rest (haven't seen any herons lately).

tarafitness Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > tarafitness Wrote: > > > > > Boo to all the people deliberately ignoring > the > > > 'please don't feed me bread' signs :( > > > > > > Whilst that annoys me greatly as well, to be > fair, > > maybe they are not "deliberately ignoring" the > > signs? > > > > Maybe they just haven't seen or read them? > > They were stood right next to the signs :D I passed by there yesterday and only saw one sign? I think if I had seen anybody feeding ducks bread next to it I might have had a polite word with them :)

Loutwo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But as foxy himself has explained, he has resolved > any ?issue? there may have been, and it is not > relevant to the current discussion about when this > restaurant will be opening. I'm sure DulwichFox is able to speak for himself!

Loutwo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don?t want to involve myself here, but I do > think people should cut foxy some slack. He has a > lot going on, as he has told everyone on this > thread, and has other concerns aside from this > forum. > Louisa, Dulwich Fox is still posting very frequently on the forum, on many different threads.

Popcorn time .....

Well, lucky lucky you, then.

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue, > another option for you might be to join a car club > like Zip, and just book one when you need it? It is indeed, but the problem with that is (I think?) that you can't leave a car in another town you are staying in and then use another car to come back. So it would work out very expensive if you were staying somewhere for a few days but not using the car while you were there.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but surely it's dangerous to public health > everywhere? Young children aren't just found > around schools! > > Whilst that's true, the Pareto Principle (80:20 > Rule) would suggest that concentrating on areas > around schools would have a greater impact on > children than random sweeps - given any fixed > resource. Poo around schools has a much higher > chance of impacting children than just randomly in > streets away from schools. Yes, agreed!

It's obviously good that the police are taking it up, but surely it's dangerous to public health everywhere? Young children aren't just found around schools!

Fitzgeraldo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ultra Low Emission Zone ? extension of scheme > October 2021 > > I have every sympathy with Mayor Khan?s plans to > reduce toxic fumes within an area boundaried by > London's North and South Circular roads. However, > as an impoverished pensioner and the owner of an > elderly petrol-powered motor car, I am a little > worried at the prospect of having to pay 12.50 per > day to park outside my house. I require my motor > car in order to visit my children, travel to > friends and family who are spread around the > country (not always conveniently placed for links > via public transport) along with a range of other > uses. Is anyone aware of plans for a scrappage > scheme that applies to privately owned vehicles > or, along with vast numbers of less-than -wealthy > residents, will I be forced to give up ownership > of a vehicle as a result of the crippling > associated costs? How will this scheme be greeted > by people even more impoverished than myself? I'm all for reducing pollution, and I am in the same boat. Not all elderly cars fail the emission test (as somebody says above, you can find out by putting the reg number into the ULEZ website) , but my regularly serviced Micra does. I'm hoping not to have to scrap it. I'm hoping somebody who lives outside the ULEZ and isn't likely to travel into the ULEZ very often might take it off my hands. My mechanic reckons my best bet would be to part exchange it at a dealers, but I'm not sure how that would work or whether a dealer would want it. I don't know whether I will replace it or just hire a car when I need to, which would probably work out cheaper overall but be a lot less convenient.

tarafitness Wrote: > Boo to all the people deliberately ignoring the > 'please don't feed me bread' signs :( Whilst that annoys me greatly as well, to be fair, maybe they are not "deliberately ignoring" the signs? Maybe they just haven't seen or read them?

:)) Just been to the Curzon in Bloomsbury. ?9 for him and ?7 for elderly me. Lovely place, too. Drinks were a bit pricey, though!

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My problem with Superdrug is not that it isn't > gentrified enough for ED, but that it is too > gentrified. > > It's post-gentrification blandness. For a start, > who is even going to want to be seen to be in > there? > > This sort of uniform identikit shop arriving is a > very dangerous precedent for the rest of the > just-about-gentrified-enough-now-thank-you high > street. Well, there's already Cafe Nero, GBK, White Stuff, Sweaty Betty, Oliver Bonas and other chains. I think there's a pretty good mix of chains and independent shops at the moment. I know what you mean, but I'd rather have Superdrug than the Londis which it is replacing. To the best of my knowledge, Londis didn't sell anything which you couldn't easily get elsewhere locally, whereas Superdrug will. I just hope it won't affect Lloyds too much, but I mainly use Lloyds for prescriptions. I won't be buying perfume, synthetic perfume makes me feel ill, so I use essential oils (now, I'd be happy to see Neals's Yard Apothecary open round here!)

Loutwo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hope we aren?t back to the old arguments of > being seen to buy stuff from a small independent > just so people can see you going in there, > regardless of the price? > Whose "old arguments"?

In our experience the food in Surma is very good (and not cold) and the staff friendly. We have eaten there a few times lately. The food in Memsaab is also good and the staff friendly, but it's a bit disconcerting the way they lurk by the door and grab you as you are passing. We reckon it's to stop us going to Surma (depends which direction you are coming from, obviously :)) )

edcam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry to hear this but to be honest, penstemons > promise more than they deliver. I hope your > thieves dwell on that once they realise their > folly. Nooooo! Penstemons are lovely! :)

There are lots of easy and free image resizers if you Google. Here's one: http://www.picresize.com

Passiflora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That really helps in my case Sue as didn't know > someone could phone 111 if you are a carer for > somebody and the local GP do not want to know. > > Will have to look into this. I don't have any idea exactly what may be available via 111, so please don't raise your hopes. It may be that the person needs to change their GP if they need home visits on a frequent basis and their GP can't or won't provide them.

That's very sad news. Sorry for your loss.

Depending on the issue, if you phone 111 you may be referred on to a GP who will do a home visit. Although the 111 system has changed recently, so that may no longer be the case. Last Summer a GP (not mine) was on his way to me after I called 111. They initially asked me to go to the surgery (not mine), but I was totally unable to as I couldn't sit up, let alone get out of bed :( However after he had spoken to me on the phone on his way there he called an ambulance (as it became clear that I needed tests which could only be done in hospital and not by him). But if that hadn't been the case, it would in effect have been a home visit. Not sure if that helps if the reason the elderly person needs a home visit is for regular check ups rather than one off incidents.