nxjen

lurkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm currently trying to get my husband to fit the > wireless so we have access to our baby monitor at > the bistro.. > Does this mean you leave your baby alone in the house while you go to the bistro and feel it sufficient to monitor you baby over the internet?

197 / 216

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I started alternating an annual Art Pass with annual Tate Membership but I found the Art Pass brought much greater flexibility, choice and savings that I've now decided to stick with the Art Pass. The only thing I miss is not being able to use the Members Lounge at Tate Modern which has a lovely view over the river, St Paul's and the City of London.

A few years ago, Alex Lester had a piece on his radio show about builders and other workmen who came round to look at a job to give a quote and were never heard from again. His theory was they were abducted by aliens.

I had a visit a year or so ago from a couple of firemen asking about smoke alarms. I thought it was well dodgy but when I looked out on the street there was a fire engine parked at the end of the road.

And then they'll start charging private houses

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whether this is a practice that has gone > unchallenged for many years or whether individual > businesses have negotiated with Southwark for > which there may be a rental cost is an important > dstinction. I think the point is that the shops are displaying goods / setting up seating on what falls within the boundaries of their own property, so there's a reason it's gone unchallenged and the Council have no right to charge rental. If they want to keep that part of the pavement clear, then the Council should be paying compensation to the shopkeepers.

Perhaps it's irony, perhaps it's not.

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do think that shops should not be able to > encroach further by using valuable pavement space. > It's nothing personal towards the traders but the > very narrow pavements along Lordship Lane are far > too small for the increase in pedestrian usage > built up over the last 20 years and pavements are > for pedestrians I feel. Maybe the many shops who > do encroach should consider themselves lucky to > have been able to do this for free for so long. > Rather than make a charge all pavements should now > be freed up for walkers/pushchairs/wheelchairs > etc.who have to jostle for the existing space. I was under the impression that the strip of pavement immediately outside the shop was actually part of the shop's premises. This is why there is a problem with pooling when it rains on other parts of Lordship Lane and the pavement is not under the control of the Council. I can remember back to 1984 and the DIY shop definitely displayed goods on the pavement then, it is nice to see that photo of the couple who ran the shop at that time. And for those who made the New Delhi reference - shame on you. The old photo EDHistory posted showing 20-22 Lordship Lane (date?) clearly shows goods displayed outside on the pavement. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1741228

rch Wrote: -------------------------------------------------------> > If nothing else, Dulwich has a higher elderly > demographic than any other part of the borough, > who don't have access to internet facilities (or > cars, for that matter)... hence my ongoing > campaigns for leaflet communications wherever > possible. I have found statistics to confirm that Dulwich has a slightly higher percentage of over 65s than other parts of the borough but this covers a huge age range and I'm not sure the lower end of this age group could be classed as elderly. Do you have any statistics that break down the age groups further? Can you point me in the right direction also regarding statistics about lack of internet connection. This might be true of those at the upper end of the age group but those at the lower end of the group, probably recently retired, would have used the internet at work and are Internet savvy. Blimey, most of them are posting on the EDF. Also age is not the only criteria to be used regarding provision of a local Southwark face to face office. There are questions of mobility and general health. Are there any statistics that throw any light on these factors for Dulwich? I would repeat that in an ideal world it would be great to have a local community office but it's a question of limited resources and priorities.

Yes I understand that but whilst I am happy for my heir to have this information, which I will give to her personally at some stage, it is not information I would like written down in an office outside of my control. I appreciate that solicitors will do their utmost to ensure security but internet security brings enough anxiety without having all the information written down all together in one place. Besides, this information is changing all the time, passwords and usernames are updated all the time. I have made provision for what will happen to my material "wealth" when I die but I did this without giving details of e.g. my bank accounts. I don't see my internet legacy differs.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Got it Peckhamrye. > > I've used William and Bailey before for mortgage > work so if the Will Aide idea doesn't come > together for any reason, I'll certainly speak to > them. Nxjen, who did you use in Forest Hill? The firm of solicitors I went to in Forest Hill was Armstrong & Co.

I looked into this about 18 months ago and the quotes I received from three solicitors based in East Dulwich, including William Bailey were ?500. I went out of the area and used a solicitor in Forest Hill with a considerable saving and was happy with the service. I'm finding more and more there is an "East Dulwich Premium" these days. As an aside, one of those solicitors in East Dulwich sent me a form for me to complete with all my online user accounts and passwords - No Way!! Has anyone else had this experience and is it something many solicitors request?

"We need community facilities" In a perfect world I would agree but this is a wealthy area in a borough that still has a lot of poverty and deprivation and as such I am happy any revenue raised from the M&S development is diverted to the middle of the borough. It's somewhat parochial to argue that because the money was raised from a development in Dulwich that it should remain in Dulwich.

I chatted with one of the guys on site just after they started work and he reckoned they'd be on site for about two years.

I've been given about 3 or 4 freebies at Pret over the last year or so, and as I'm neither a regular customer nor young and attractive, I think it's entirely random. Lovely surprise when it's happened though and has made my day!

"I would understand in an art gallery ..." Most public galleries are very happy for photographs to be taken except for special exhibitions.

It could be construed, I suppose, as an invasion of privacy for other customers, especially where children are concerned, so maybe there just has to be a blanket ban. Though perhaps someone was just feeling irritable, grumpy and officious.

This explains why many (most?) are not enthused about smart homes https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/12/english-man-spends-11-hours-trying-to-make-cup-of-tea-with-wi-fi-kettle

Looks like it's becoming a reality http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/london-mayor-sadiq-khan-accelerates-plans-rotherhithe-bridge/ ETA How refreshing it is to have a Mayor more concerned with the needs of Londoners than his own vanity.

We've had a warm, wet summer which has made for ideal growing conditions and more growth than usual. It's now the time of year when people think about cutting back excessive foliage in preparation for winter and I suspect cutting back overgrown shrubs and trees will already be on a 'to do' list for many without any prompting. What's that saying about the none so righteous as the converted?!! http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1532452

It's like I caught the part of the Overground that travels through Denmark Hill two days after it started running. I caught it in the rush hour and it was empty. Look at it now!

I took a 42 this morning, taking the long way round from Camberwell to Sainsbury's. I'm wondering what the bus drivers think about driving down Red Post Hill, seemed like a slalom ride to me.

http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/council-quells-fears-dog-may-fatally-poisoned-walk-peckham-rye/