Earl Aelfheah

The black cabs have had a monopoly for ages. Uber should not be allowed to replace it with another one, but that?s not a defence of black cabs.

If you crossed the dotted line, you shouldn?t have been fined and should definitely appeal. For those that say it?s OK to drive up the bus lane- you?re wrong and it makes it difficult/ dangerous for those turning at the proper place (as someone wizzes up, undertaking on the left).

... that said, I saw someone on a Boosted board (e-skateboard) this morning and whilst it looked incredibly fun, he was far from in control/ stable. Those things are a lot faster than most e-scooters too.

I?m all in favour of electric vehicles if they get more people out of their cars (which they probably do). Just a shame that SE London doesn?t see to have the same kind of coverage as other areas of London again. The new Uber ?Jump!? Bikes are the best, but they don?t even come as far south as the north bank of the Thames.

I am not a fan of black cabs generally. Have had to put up with racist 'banter' from cabbies, been refused going south of the river and have often witnessed their deliberate attempts to intimidate cyclists. I know a lot of cabbies are decent, hard working and professional, but as a highly regulated and not inexpensive service, you shouldn't have these sorts of behaviours at all. They are a powerful lobby and so have been pandered to by successive majors (being excluded from the same ULEZ standards as everyone else for example). The truth is that impressive as it may be to memorise every street in London, this is no longer a relevant skill. And what is left (driving a car) is something that many people can do. It shouldn't be such a closed shop / monopoly imo.

yorksgirl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sainsburys was built on what was at the time > supposedly protected green space with public > access to the whole space. How the Southwark > councillors and officers swore on their very > lives, at the time, that there would be no further > loss of public space or access, ever. Grim to have > to say this as a lifelong Labour voter but think > open spaces locally were better protected under > Lib Dems. This ^

... Or create segregated cycle lanes like they have in Camden and many other Boroughs (as opposed to painting a bike symbol on a few roads).

Why don't they spend the money raised on extending the Santander hire bike scheme to Southwark?

I know I?m a grumpy old man, but when did it become standard / acceptable to put your feet up on the seats when sitting on the train. I don?t remember this being a thing (except perhaps amongst surly teenagers) in the past. Now grown men and women get on the train and the trotters go up without a thought or care. Should have put this in the small things irrational rage thread perhaps 🤔

How about "Dr Billious' Emporium for the Maladious Multiudes off Melbourne Grove"? The name could be displayed off centre, on a sign painted gentrification grey and printed in Helvetica. Would be very 'on brand' for ED.

My recollection (I think they posted on the forum if anyone can locate it) was that the rent was put up massively and they decided that it didn't make sense to stay in those premises. They had a shop in Covent Garden and a concession in Harrods and sold into some supermarkets, so it wasn't a case of going bust or anything, just a decision about the viability of that particular store post the rent hike.

We are unfortunate in SE London to be reliant on a suburban train service, run primarily for bankable weekday season ticket holders from Kent and Surrey. The train companies do the minimum that they're obliged to in terms of inconvenient inner london travellers and no more. This is why it would be good if the whole service was handed over to TFL.

These courses look good, but the kids ones seem to be on weekday mornings.

it doesn't feel like SE London get's its fair share of the Capital's transport investment by a long way. Our local politicians should be shouting very loudly. Instead 'improvements' appear to stop with making travel by car more difficult.

This is a depressing thread on about every possible level.

I would suggest going in and trying the place before passing judgement. They've obviously had a few delays, but that's often par for the course when opening a new venture.

I'm talking about why people might feel more motivated to protest against someone they profoundly disagree with in the White House, than the leader of another country to which they perhaps don't identify with personally, to the same degree. Sometimes these visits are just about 'doing business', but as a country many of us have a deeper sense investment the US in terms of it's ideology, culture and history. This is why people feel more compelled to voice their view on the POTUS than some other leaders. I wasn't talking about any trade negotiations - just responding to the understandable parallels being drawn between this state visit and other (less remarked upon, but equally if not more dubious) ones.

It's true that as a country we've rolled out the red carpet for some pretty nasty characters in the past. But I do think it's different with the POTUS. The US is one of our closest allies; we share many aspects of our culture and history. One would hope that we have more influence in this regard and perhaps more of a responsibility to be a critical friend. You might (rightly) speak more honestly, openly and even critically, to a friend than a business acquaintance for example.

This shop is a great addition to the Lane.

Electric Uber bikes now operating in London (but not in SE London / Southwark obvs).

Well they're using their vote to highlight how undemocratic the EU is, so maybe they will.

If you're pro Brexit and you want to send the strongest message possible, make sure you tick both UKIP and the Brexit party when you vote.

wulfhound Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah - yes they do, have seen them around the > area recently although not in any great numbers > yet. Fair enough, for some reason I thought that they were only operating across a few boroughs - I stand corrected. I have already seen a couple of nicked Limes, with the batteries removed locally - but not spotted any 'legit' ones yet.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not engines, batteries! They?re electric assist. > You still pedal but it helps, especially with > hills or not being all sweaty when you arrive at > your destination. Becoming increasingly popular in > other countries as a way of encouraging people to > cycle longer distances or for older people or > those with health issues. Definitely not an > engine though. ... but again, they don't come to SE London (like nearly all significant new transport infrastructure).

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Things like this have to be simply administered. > If your vehicle doesn't meet the standard set out, > you pay. If it does, you don't. Isn't that the point though. A motorbike is (probably) less polluting than a 10 year old petrol car, but the latter is exempted, the former not? I might have this wrong, but that seems to be what was suggested above. Certainly black cabs are exempted, so it all seems a bit random tbh.