Sally Eva

Hi Blah Blah, Yes, of course, every word of that is true and the Southwark Food Bank are speaking up for themselves. The poverty that food banks are aimed at is certainly not self-induced. What SFB say is an interesting insight into the problems they face trying to cater to the need and how central actual cash is to what they do. I am very open to the idea that I am wrong. BWs Sally

this money not food sounds right and I have been trying to work out why I don't think it is. I belong to two organisations which are allowed to distribute food vouchers and the process is very tightly controlled. Before someone is given a food voucher a great deal is known about them and how they came to be in this position. No one who deals with people when they are this vulnerable and unable to manage their own affairs gives them money. Food is what they need, a roof over their heads and a bed to put under that roof. Some places (like the 999 Club in Deptford) give free hot meals and a warm room to eat them in. Donate money to the organisations yes probably (Centrepoint, St Mungo's) but to the needy food is probably better.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not much point it being illegal if there are no > sanctions and no policing of it. > > Much like the 20 speed limit :( You are right. We all know this. Drivers ignore the law unless there's a policeman behind them. Why is this? We don't steal each others possessions unless there's a CCTV camera in the living room. The Daily Mail doesn't condemn law-enforcement and burglar alarms as "war on the naturally light-fingered"

Tell your councillor, Renata Hamvas, and she will sort out whether they have permission to do this. Or councillor Barrie Hargrove chair of Parks and Leisure who can get a parks officer to check what's going on

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is probably the 4th time since living here > that I've seen this so I do wonder if it needs to > be made more visible. Still struggle to figure out > how a car going at normal speed would end up like > this but I'm glad you got yourself out of the > predicament in the end. If it was higher the car would have been quite badly damaged from the impact but would have been easier to extricate I should think. So the road would have been blocked for a shorter time. It is black so I guess it could be painted a brighter colour.

I've just looked at the image. This sort of obstruction is intended to stop vehicles cutting across or parking on the pavement. You see them at the edges of roads, mostly to stop lorries cutting the junction by driving across part of the pavement or parking on it. This was presumably what the supermarket delivery van was attempting to do. The aim is often to stop the motor vehicle using a space too narrow for them to take at speed or even too narrow go through at all. What was your friend attempting to do?

Buss = kiss http://www.dictionary.com/browse/buss I don't know how I knew that. Probably Shakespeare

If you are disabled, the council will put a disabled parking bay outside your home, and enforce it. You can apply here: https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=1304&np=1

The link which I posted says: Parking near junctions (Rule 243) being one piece of advice stating: ?DO NOT stop or park opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space?. Almost all of us have parked within 10 metres of a junction at some point and as can be seen by observing car parking habits around us, many people park too close on a daily basis. IF IT?S NOT ILLEGAL, CAN I STILL GET A TICKET? Although there?s not a law that specifically prohibits motorists from parking close to a junction, you may still find your vehicle ticketed on your return. A non-endorsable (no penalty points added to your driving licence) Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) under the offence of unnecessary obstruction will see you fined ?50, or up to ?100 for more serious circumstances. There's quite a lot more but I thought I wouldn't post it all. For further discussion see: https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/nearest-you-can-park-to-a-junction.html

Hi Mikeb, that's what I used to think -- that the rule was not enforceable -- it was just a good idea. However that link which I posted https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/nearest-you-can-park-to-a-junction.html says that it can be enforced by PCSOs.

I always feel that "locals" is less respectful than "local people". Like calling people "blacks" or "whites". It misses out the most important aspect of other people's humanity

the Highway Code says drivers should not park less than 10m from the corner. As we know this is completely ignored both by drivers and PCSOs. The HC is taken into account by courts when deciding on negligence and compensation but this is of course after an accident. So the council is introducing 7.5m double yellows on corners in order to control this behaviour without waiting for someone to get hurt. I think it should be 10m myself. its HC rule 243 and it is discussed here: https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/nearest-you-can-park-to-a-junction.html

You are thinking of this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21040410 important thoughts

plus 1 paint has few protective qualities and occasional speed bumps don't stop people racing from one to the next. Speed cushions make life a lot worse by pushing fast oncoming traffic into the middle of the road. Sinusoidal humps do slow traffic because they are unavoidable but, as you say, the accelerate, brake, accelerate, brake effect is not very wonderful. They work when put in at very high densities. Southwark doesn't put them in at high densities. This report discusses pollution and speed humps: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38156778

well yes, a verbal agreement is binding but do you really want to insist on having a landlady who doesn't want you? you surely aren't thinking of going to court? She can just deny it. Then it would obviously be her word against yours -- and you would be spending lots of money on court fees even if you didn't pay a lawyer.

sorry I meant to send a private msge

Hi TE44, I don't think I posted a link. I know nothing about this man personally so I am not commenting on his situation. I am saying that homeless people who apply for council homelessness assistance are considered on their "priority need" which is their vulnerability. Their alcoholism or mental illness are factors which make them more likely to be deemed to have a priority need, not less likely. People who are refused council assistance may be referred to charitable hostels and may not want or be able to go for various reasons -- one of which that they are not eligible for Housing Benefit or the often frightening conditions in these hostels (as people have described to me). The council takes wrong decisions on vulnerability. If you know someone turned away by the council whom you think should have been assisted then send them to Citizens Advice. St Mungos is a great organisation which does wonderful work. Anything they say will be important and correct.

Hi TE44, No one will be given a council or housing association house without going through the homelessness system. That is the system. Council run hostels which are part of the homelessness system do not demand rehab, psychiatric treatment etc. The system is hard, housing is in extremely short supply. Don't give people the idea that there are more obstacles than actually exist or those who could qualify will not apply. Many homeless people do not like the over-night charitable hostels because they are full of mentally ill drunks. This gentleman does not sound mentally ill or drunk and that might be why he does not use them. He may not be vulnerable enough to qualify for council assistance or he may prefer a life under the stars.

This article is about the US and Canada. It doesn't apply to the UK or to this gentleman. In the UK homeless people have a right to housing if they have a priority need ie if they are old, sick or mentally ill. They don't have to promise to be a fit, well, sober or clean-living person. If this gentleman fulfills these criteria ie he is old, sick or mentally ill then Southwark should house him. Renata is looking in to this. If he fulfills these criteria and Southwark don't house him he should go to Citizens Advice. But all this only works if he wants to be housed. As Pugwash said.

there's a lot more discussion including action by the councillor in this thread http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1855002

London Borough of Southwark North Cross Road Market The London Borough of Southwark (prohibition of Vehicles and Waiting Restrictions) (North Cross Road Market) Traffic Order 2017.Th e council of the London Borough of Southwark will make the above-mentioned traffic order on 19 October 2017, the effects of which are described in the attached notice. If you wish to be sent copies of this order or relevant drawings, in either a digital or paper format, please contact me using the details below. If you wish to make any comments regarding these proposals, please send them to [email protected], quoting reference ?TMO1718-North Cross Road Market?.

Legal commentary on "finders keepers" etc. Personal anecdote -- about 30 years ago my handbag fell off my bag (not properly secured obviously). The person who found it handed it in to the police and I got it back. About 40 years ago as a very young person I left my purse on the bus with my week's wages in it (?11 :)) and the person who found it handed it in and I got it back. I can feel very fond of the human race. They can be very caring and careful for others, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8129534.stm

boss of Deliveroo tells MPs that giving workforce minimum wage, holiday and sick pay will add ?1 to each meal https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/oct/10/deliveroo-workers-rights-uber

Lots of trains https://www.thetrainline.com/train-times/bromley-south-to-east-dulwich

sounds like the owner needs this: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prevent-japanese-knotweed-from-spreading