Rockets

@DulvilleRes well sorry to disappoint you but I have affiliation to any local political party nor OneDulwich. You keep making these veiled suggestions that I somehow are but you're going on nothing more than a hunch. My conscience is clear: that I post here with no vested interest, no links to any group that is involved in the debate. I very much suspect there are more than a few who post on here in whose interests it is to try and deposition anyone who dares challenge the nonsense decisions made by the council and the blinkered and undemocratic way they have behaved over the last 5 years. Clearly, there are some who only bleat on about accountability and transparency when it suits their agenda. Look what happened when I mentioned the name of the controversial Dulwich Society Transport sub-committe lead and their award winning work as an active travel lobbyist. All of which was publicly available on the DS website and in media published articles yet someone asked for the name to be removed. Knowledge is power and for too often the council, and their apologists, have been happy to try and hide ensure people are not aware of what actually has been going on. You should be thanking people like me and the likes of OneDulwich for ensuring our elected leaders are held to account. One suspects some of the hypocritical ones on here would be happy if this wasn't the Labour party that was in the spotlight.

I am glad you have clarified that because what you said did suggest you had heard it from someone on the inside, perhaps be clearer next time? But, to be honest, if you are assured by an statement from a politician that poses more questions than answers then you must have more faith in politicians than many of us! Time will tell who is right because clearly the council is funding the refunds within the next month.

I have always suspected there were some council insiders/party members on this thread. Who assured you? Are you now the official spokesperson for the council on this thread? Also McAsh refers to contractors (plural). Is there more than one? If so, how did more than one contactor make the same mistake?

Well they are, until they reclaim it off the contractors - which, as anyone with a modicum of business sense will know, is a lot easier to say than do (especially if someone from the council did sign-off or had oversight of the letters). If it was easy I am sure the council would not be having to issue the refunds themselves would they - so until such time as they get the money back the council are down £500,000 - are they not?

If you believe everything a politician tells you in the media then good luck to you....you're either very, very trusting or a big fan of theirs... There is more than enough in the statement McAsh put out to suggest it might not be plain sailing...the contractors are unlikely to sit back and take a £500,000 hit because McAsh says so in a statement. But, to be honest, you were picking an argument with @Penguin68 and anyone who properly read the statement could tell @Penguin68 was right and you were wrong.

And nowt to do with this thread so why post it? Come on @malumbukeep it on topic, you have been warned sbout this before.

The wasting money is though isnt it.....if they are unable to recover the full costs of the refunds then clearly they have £500,000 less to waste on projects like Dulwich Square, which have been funded by their over zealous, and seemingly now erroneous, fining of car drivers. Clearly someone at the council wasn't keeping tabs on what their agents were up to....

...after they, the council, have paid the refunds...which is exactly what @Penguin68 was saying.

@march46 I think you need to re-read it. McAsh's quote does seem to suggest that the council will repay the fine this month and will recover the costs of those refunds from the contractors (I doubt that part will be done within a month) - interesting use of plural there in his quote - is there more than one contractor involved? I do suspect it may not be clear cut that the council gets the full cost of refunds there could be a fight ahead because McAsh's quote does also say they are strengthening checks with the contractors - which suggests they may not have been strong enough in the first place, especially as the fines are issued in the name of Southwark Council - so was anyone from the council checking/signing this stuff off? Councillor James McAsh, Southwark's cabinet member for clean air, streets and waste, said: "We have reviewed all other notices and found no further issues. "We are also strengthening our checks with contractors to make sure this does not happen again. The council will recover the full cost of the refunds from the contractors." The council issued 10,422 penalty charge notices to people caught on CCTV driving in bus lanes, but the the wrong legislation appeared on the notices. It said: "We will reimburse all motorists and refunds will automatically be applied to the accounts of those affected within the next month."

Does StreetScan use the same data source as the numbers Sadiq showed recently on crime across London- where he claimed an annual drop of 13% in theft from person across London? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62nqvzzq79o

The Sydenham Hill cycle lanes are a very visual reminder of the nonsense of the council policy regarding cycle infrastructure. A massive white elephant if there ever was one. Very much a case of: if you build it sometimes they won't come. An utter waste of tax-payers money - one does wonder how much it cost.

It seems to suggest the notices made reference to the wrong legislation. It says: The council issued 10,422 penalty charge notices to people caught on CCTV driving in bus lanes, but the the wrong legislation appeared on the notices. Earlier this year the AA said thousands of drivers across London have been paying invalid penalty charge notices (PCNs) due to enforcement and restriction cameras that relied upon expired Traffic Management Orders or lacked updated certification. And then goes on to say: Earlier this year the AA said thousands of drivers across London have been paying invalid penalty charge notices (PCNs) due to enforcement and restriction cameras that relied upon expired Traffic Management Orders or lacked updated certification.

Excellent news - congratulations!

There are some people who really don't like it when the council has to face the consequences of, and are held accountable for, their actions. Maybe they should spend less time defending the council and ponder how things like this can happen time and time again. Good news, of course, is that the council has £500,000 less to waste on vanity projects like Dulwich Square now!

And I think this is the crux of the issue - people get annoyed when they see drivers ignoring the rules so they also get annoyed when they see cyclists ignoring the rules and nowadays you can often see cyclists ignoring the rules at every junction in London. No that is a fact. If you jump red lights all day in a car you will get fined and, most likely, a lot of points on your licence. Why? Because red light driving violations are policed at many junctions to stop people doing it. Is there the same policing of cyclists? No. I get the "loss of momentum" argument but us smart cyclists realise that losing their momentum is far better than encountering someone else's momentum midway through the junction. I was at the DV/Red Post Hill junction today and a cyclist quite literally played Frogger weaving between cars coming from his left and right as he jumped a red light. Absolute idiot or "statistic in waiting" as I like to say! No doubt if a car had hit him someone (like Dulwich Roads) would have posted about how awful cars are and how dangerous our roads are for cyclists.

And now by setting up a new party they are doing the same again. We have to hope this fails and dies very quickly else all they may do is hand Reform the keys to No.10. Given Corbyn is involved there is a high chance of failure.

I am just hoping the Londis retains the pick and mix of the original on Lordship Lane! A drunken late night bag of lemon sherbets, crusty Jelly Babies and some nondescript thing covered in chocolate was always a favourite of mine!

Errr, are you accusing me of celebrating it.....I posted it.....does that qualify me of not being a decent person...be careful @malumbu you're sailing very close to breaking forum rules that that one?

Except for the hierarchy of road users of course, which was brought in in 2022, where the larger, faster vehicle has greater responsibility to reduce risk to others. @exdulwicher I agree with the conservation of momentum point you raise and I often see cyclists doing stupid things who just can't be bothered to stop. There is also another phenomenon that may be happening here as well (which I think TFL called out when they did some research on red light jumping cyclists) which is the pack mentality and the, "well if they do it I will too". I think TFL said that they were concerned that the problem grows rapidly because it is contagious. I have often felt hugely pressurised to move when a light is red by the impatient people behind me or those whizzing by me (I have even got into arguments with other cyclists over the issue). I also feel it is these behaviours that are driving the increasing frustration many people have with cyclists as they see increasing numbers of them ignoring the rules and treating roads (and pavements) as if they are the only ones using them. As far as I am concerned the rules are there to not only protect others from me but to protect me from others and I often see cyclists doing things that, if their luck runs out one day, will see them in hospital or worse.

BBC News - Motorists to get refunds on 10,000 bus lane fines https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjdy9z0pxnmo

Good luck Maria, keep fighting!

To be fair I am only amplifying the report @Earl Aelfheah shared and, we presume, validated or peer-reviewed.....;-)

So should it say then that the area around the street is safe or unsafe. I am not entirely sure the website is flawed, just that some of you dont like the conclusions it comes to about certain streets. It's hilarious to see where this has gone since people started questioning whether a PCSO had said what they said to me. Bottom line remains that there is increasing rates of certain types of crime in and around the LTN, so much so that a website refers to some of the streets as unsafe or even dangerous. People I speak to locally, who do not have a vested interest in the LTN one way or another, are concerned about growing rates of crime. And just because some of the usual suspect lobbyists on here try to convince us that is not the case doesn't mean it is not an issue.

Errr? Which factual error is that exactly? I shared the data I found from the police website about recorded crimes in Dulwich Village and then shared the data I found on recorded crimes on Calton Avenue from the website @Earl Aelfheah shared. Some of you are trying yourselves in knots - it's hilarious.

Errr, hang on one minute. You realise it was @Earl Aelfheah who shared the link from which that data was shared right? I am not sure how I am wearing it when this was posted by someone else as a form of rebuttal to my data? It's laughable how you are trying to pin what theu shared on me. Ha ha but a good enough barometer for Sadiq Khan to use....as he did yesterday. Which, anyone who is taking a closer look also puts what is happening on Calton into sharp focus. Honestly, some of you accuse me of trying to mislead and present erroneous facts yet it is some of you who are desperately trying to smoke screen what is actually going on. What are you scared of? Accountability perhaps? The laughable thing is that some accuse me of behaving in an embarrassing way. If only they took a look at themselves in the mirror. Rest assured as far as they are concerned everything is awesome and there is not even a single slight negative to anything the active travel lobby has ever put in place. Ever. And anyone who dare suggests there may be is a far right, petrol head Reform voter who is clearly doing it for political reasons. Ha ha, two thirds of those are within LTNs....can anyone see what they were rated before the LTNs went in? Yipee. I am sure anyone who has experienced theft from person in the Calton area is utterly rejoicing at this. Honestly, talk about selective plucking... But hang on @Earl Aelfheah shared this. Does this put you at odds with them, I thought you were on the same side as them? @Earl Aelfheah can you confirm in what context you shared that website and whether you validated the content within when you.shared it?