DJKillaQueen

Unfortunately the gaming commission have declared the lottery as null and void because it would seem that woof does not hold the required licence! Very bad woof. I just knew it was a scam all along >:D<

I haven't offended you at all. My posts regard the licence that Dulwich Hamlet holds. How on earth is that offensive to you? You are not responsible for late night parties that breach the licence which is what the OP is complaining about.

Did you see the Lee Miller exhibition a few years ago? (I think it was at Barbican)

I've been cycling in London for over 20 years and it has always been popular. What are you talking about Steve lol? Cyclists are as valid a road user as any vehicle and given that a car can travel at much greater speed I hardly think cycling speeds are a worry. In fact the opposite is true. Drivers often misread the speed of a cyclist because their brain automatically thinks, 'cycle, I can go faster' which is why the most common accident involving cyclists are collisions after cars overtake them and turn left or right. Technically a cycle has the right to go as fast as the speed limit. Most cyclists can't cycle at 30mph, obviously but some can get up to 25 miles per hour. Today I used the super highway for the first time (up and around Tower Bridge and the East End). The bit I used not only had a kerb seperating it from the road, but also another kerb seperating it from the pavement. That's how cycle lanes should be.

I think it does do that but Sue is right...take it to the bank...they will almost certainly be able to reunite it with it's owner.

quite like the idea of putting up rents for council tenants who no longer need subsidised housing. It would need an appropriate sliding scale, so people don't feel penalised when their income improves. In addition let's force landlords to lower people's rents when their income diminishes so that people don't feel penalised when they become poorer, and so that we the tax payers don't feel ripped off when Housing Benefit pays a landlord's mortgage for them. There is something distinctly unfair about linking the salaries of the poorest to their rent whilst leaving everyone else to their own devices.

What is the last one Waynetta? I love that painting.

That's more like it! And not a hairy armpit in sight either.

Doing a Van Gogh......never have been a fan of Hockney.

How right you are Woof. After all this is a thread about art and this painting by the great impressionist Courbet is one of my favourite's...lol. Puts the hairy armpits into perspective too I think. http://photos4.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/5/a/6/b/600_16643147.jpeg

In relation to sepcific post war building programmes yes...but I did say that in one of my earliest posts when describing where the money came from for some programmes during times of acute housing shortage. The 30's is the other such period.

*shudders at the thought of anything from the 80's being back in fashion* You've also just rewired my view of Picasso lol.

See that painting I don't really like woof....looks like something out of an Athena poster shop form the 80's.

I totally agree with that...but when someone says cyclists shouldn't be on the road then I have to read that as a problem of attitude to cyclists. The truth is that whatever form of transport you use the roads are there for all and part of being a safe driver is being aware of everything around you at all times. Most drivers/cyclists/ motorcyclists are safe thankfully and drive accordingly. Buses drivers on the other hand...lol....

The motorist that turned left was completely at fault (and wasn't indicating either). I was in a cycle lane too so that tells any driver to double check the lane before crossing it. When you turn (or do any manouvre) you should always check immediately before carrying it out - every road user learns that, but some forget to do it. I had absolutely no time to react. And many cyclists get hit by cars that overtake them and turn in front of them (and those are cyclists the driver did see). Obviously there are some cyclists, just like drivers who ride dangerously but there are some drivers who also don't have any respect for cyclists. Daizie, cyclists are never going to win in a collision with a car. Car's however kill people every day and the majority of collisions are between motor vehicles. So maybe it's car's that are too dangerous to be on the roads not cyclists. What can be said though is that some drivers resent having to slow down for cyclists - which means the problem is one of attitude, not cycling in itself.

lol...very good. Damn it...we need a revolution...........!

The 50's and 60's programme of house building was a government response to a chronic shortage of decent housing in post war Britain is why current tenants don't pay towards those debts. And council rents have on average, doubled over the past 20 years. The view that social housing rents should be higher will only serve to push the Housing Benefit bill to the tax payer up, given that so many tenants rely on it. Either way....tax payers will pay for it. Under occupation. When the Lib Dems ran the council we introduced a scheme to encourage people to downsize. This was successful. Although I know of several examples of suceeded tenants that were not forced to downsize even though the law makes provision for that. Last year we changed tenancy agreements so that council tenants could only pass down tenancy to one subsequent generation. It had previously been two. That is true and brings things in line with the law which guarantees the right of one sucession. I wholeheartedly agree with you James in regards to tax evasion. Ideally there needs to be better means to combat both that and Benefit Fraud but we rarely hear of what is being done to combat tax evasion beyond the odd wittering of some anonymous non dom. And the higher up one goes the worse it seems to be. For example Al Fayed was able to make a deal with the tax office for an anual fixed amount of tax to pay irregardless of how much profit his businesses made....cheating the country out of millions in tax. How can that possibly have happened? Yet the self employed get fined if they even are one day late with their returns. There is also the issue of the black economy too, and who knows what the loss to the country in unpaid tax is on that one.

I had an accident not too long ago. Stationary traffic at lights started to move and a car turned left alongside me and stopped when my head was just 3 inches from being under the rear wheel. A helmet defintely saved my head from injury....but had the driver looked before turning left there would have been no accident at all. Bad and stupid cyclists aside....some drivers need to be more aware of what's happening around them and anything a cyclist can do to make themselves as visible as possible has to be common sense too. Too often drivers who hit cyclists and indeed motorcyclists offer the excuse 'I didn't see them' when actually what they mean is they didn't look. Something I have on my bicycle are tyres with a thin silver reflective strip on both sides. And I also have reflective bits on my helmet too. And then I have a flashing rear light on both my bicycle and clipped to my backpack. That should be enough.

I think it's a beautiful painting. I really love the muted colours and yes the attention to detail is stunning. More importantly (as all good art should) it makes you want to look at it. And I would rather look at that than anything by Tracy Emin or Damian Hurst any day.

Jeremy I was listing the terms of the licence, making a distiction between the part that deals with sale of alcohol and the part that deals with 'late night refreshment'. Not being petulant PGC. My issue, from what I've found out, is breach of licence. For the OP it's late night noise that is also in breach of several terms of the licence. I find it odd that the licence holder (who has posted elsewhere) is strangely silent on this thread. Davide can't provide a solution for noise from the music that has been complained about because it was after midnight and there shouldn't be any music at those times according to the terms of the licence. All the same I will mail Davide and ask for more info and then post back to the thread.

The only thing that matters Davide is that DH understand that live music and entertainment is not licensed beyond midnight/ windows must be closed/ shutters must be closed at 10.30pm and noise levels must be monitored externally by DH themselves. Sale of alcohol is only licensed til 11pm and hot food and hot (non-alcoholic) drinks are licensed til 1am on Fridays and Saturdays. Those are all things that seem to be breached on both a regular and occasional basis along with occasional abuse of opening hours according to some complaints and Southwark Licensing have been made aware. The license also has conditions for outdoor events, but there doesn't seem to be any issues regarding those. The issue seems to be only with use of the bar area for late nights parties and events, and if DH were to abide by the terms of their license there would be no issues there either. The license holder Nick (who doesn't seem to read pm's either) is the person required to make sure the terms of that license are met but has chosen not to repsond to the points on this thread it seems.

That's beautiful Narnia.

Then you have a case to appeal all but the original parking fine. This happens quite often. Councils get the address wrong and the first thing a driver knows about it is when bailiffs turn up at the correct address. As long as you can prove Lambeth made a mistake with the address then they should withdraw the bailiff and accept payment of the original fine only as settlement.

There have been some posts before about netball clubs that might be helpful....use the serach option above, you'll be able to find them.

Ha Ha.... ok here goes.... 90p ?1.19 45p 25p 80p ?1.59 How did I do? lol I'd eat all of them btw :))