fazer71

buddug Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I told James Barber all this, and told him I can't > be the only leaseholder in East Dulwich/Peckham > borders (never mind the rest of Southwark) to whom > this sort of thing is happening, but he said he > could do nothing, adding every now and again: "Why > don't you just buy the freehold"!!! Oh yes, James, Talking to the likes of jenny jones ?Green MP? you get nowhere she hasn?t got a clue about housing, she running for mayor (heaven help us if she gets in talk about living in lala land). If you can buy the freehold from Sothwark it would be ?5,000 well spent even if you bought it on a credit card at 29% interest it and used the Queens builders to carry out the works it would still be way cheaper than letting Southwark housing do it! But it's highly unlikely you would be able to buy the Freehold if Southwark still have a tenant in the building they will not sell the freehold at any price. I tried to buy my freehold and was told the computer says NO. I would also love to buy the loft space so that I could carry out a loft conversion but they won't sell the empty loft space either. Crazy Southwark has millions of pounds in empty loft spaces which they could sell to raise money yet they insist on holding onto them. This restricts the market of housing (i.e. my flat would become a 2 bed accommodating at least one but maybe two more inhabitants therefore making better use of the existing housing stock of the borough). This would be a Green solution to the housing shortage in the borough through a more efficient use of the existing housing stock. The system is causing high property prices and forcing more expensive and environmentally less green development.

Life is too short to spend my time trying to prove any corruption, that's a job for rogue traders or our local MP's (but they are too busy chasing the vote) and this is not a vote winner. I?m in IT so at the time I consulted a friend who is a surveyor and we went through the work the prices etc with a fine tooth comb I asked for and received all the information from the housing department and on paper it all adds up though at very very high rates, not rates anyone with a brain would agree too then there was the quality of the work shoddy would be an understatement! Some work was impossible to check drainage work which had never been a problem we were charged for relining the drains ?7,000 and never had a problem and I never agreed to the work it was just done, also some roof works but the roof was only a few years old and after that work there was damp coming from the rear around the chimney stack where it had previously been fine it took over a year to get them back to fix the problem and still it leaked. I ended up paying for a roofer to fix it myself because of the damage it was causing to my internal decoration. All this whilst I was contracting in Paris and too busy to check and argue the problems. The housing department surveyor has no interest in the quality of the work and he was very chummy with the works manager? they?see leasholders like me every day they know exactly what they are about and it?s a compete carve up. There is no one to talk to about the problems the council housing office don?t give a damn and they never return calls there is no accountability My surveyor friend confirmed my views that there?s are a lot of odd things going on at local government where contracts are concerned it?s pretty much a closed shop with the same old names and contractors going round and round from one council to another they know the ropes and they know how to charge and they know who makes the decisions. I?m in full time work and the last thing I want to do is investigate this. Southwark housing employs people who either don?t know what they are doing or are working in hand with the contractors to extract the biggest charges they can maybe it?s because they want to get a job with the contractors? maybe because they get taken to nice restaurants maybe because they are married to them. Who knows it?s like the Banks no one will ever get collared? I've had enough my flat is on the market I've found a nice one with a share of the freehold. If I can?t sell then I?ll keep it and rent it out until the mkt Pics up but that?s the last thing I want to do because major works are coming around again year after next and the last bill for the two flats small repairs only was almost ?25,000 my share being ? that! Criminal?

Unless anyone can think of a better solution than the 1 hr Cpz for clearing the streets of cars ??? someone (objectors) need to Magic up a better solution ........ ?? There isn't one ..... IMO may as well Make the whole of London a 1hr CPZ I see no Practical Ideas or alternative options from any of the objectors Just moan moan moan... and it'll move the cars elsewhere ( which is exactly the idea ) !

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I hr CPZ is the thin end of the wedge. It opens > the door for CPZ to creep and expand. That's not the experience in Herne Hill and other areas it keeps the commuters out ... beautifully...

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71 > > Under 'bad' things about a CPZ, you missed: > > - Bad for the permit holders inside the CPZ, as a > smaller number of car places are provided, due to > extra road markings Only if Southwark are allowed to restrict the number of places we currently have. > - Bad for all the streets around the CPZ, as > people avoiding the annual fee migrate their cars > to there. That's their problem not ours ... Maybe they should get a cpz too. > - Bad for all the streets around the CPZ, as the > local shop workers (known by Southwark council > euphemistically as 'commuters' for effect) are now > concentrated on a smaller number of streets. How do all the workers get to Harrods ??????? Why should we local care about shop workers being able to park ? They would be entitled to parking permits... anyhow. > > ... and under 'good' you missed: > > - Good for Southwark council's bank account Maybe but not by a huge ammount apparently ..... and anyway we'd get all that guaranteed parking and all the shops would get more customers from all the extra parking.... It's a no brainer.... as long as it's 1 hr CPZ

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Fazer71, > I understand your anger but if you have evidence > of criminality please do go to the Police. > Making such unsubstantiated allegations might make > you feel better but wont solve the problem at puts > at risk the forum itself. The last thing I'd want to do is put the forum at risk. But I do want people to be aware that being a leasholder under Southwark council is a very very very bad! I have racked my brain for years about the amounts I have been charged and the reaction I?ve had from the council surveyor?s contractors and workmen regarding the quality of the work and the necessity and my discussions and experiences with them have led me to the conclusion than something untoward is going on. I can see no other explanation. Unfortunately I have no proof and no time to investigate. (Too busy working to pay for it all) I have no confidence in Southwark housing department and it all stinks. A very difficult thing to prove or investigate. Just look at the London Underground contracts we all know it?s corrupt just impossible to prove. That shouldn?t mean we stick our heads in the sand?..

Huguenot buddug and I can't be the only ones who are perplexed by what we have seen, experienced and paid for. The only explanation other than wholesale incompetence is that the Southwark housing office management are being somehow influenced by the contractors. I find it hard to believe that level of incompetence is possible. So how else could the poor workmanship and astronomical costs be explained. It doesent take a rocket scientist, to explaing what might be influencing the housing office management. Only Money can have that impact.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71: > > "The problems then would be that the housing > officers would al leave the council as they > wouldn't be getting the kick backs form the > incompetent criminal contractors." > > This is a massive accusation, it's libellous, and > you should be aware that current legislation would > oblige your ISP to reveal your identity and > location if the victims chose to pursue you for > justice. Nothing that a full Police investigation wouldn't find out. That is an investigation of the workings of the Southwark housing office and it's relationship with the contractors and the experiences of the leasholders. I can see no other explanition of the level of charges and the ongoing inpact of high costs to Southwark Council and the leasholders. I have every right to say I believe it may be 100% criminal. I can see no other explanation for the level charges I have had to pay for minor works. It there no one who is prepared to investigate this disgusting practice?

Content removed because it was libellous - The Administrator

The 1 hr CZP Good For residents who can afford to pay the ?100 -?125 For business as shoppers can find a place to park For the environment as old cars dissapear For look of the area as the streets look cleaner due to movement of vehicles For tradesmen as they can find a place to park ?though they or the customer has to pay a ?2 VERY harsh NOT ? Bad For commuters driving in to use the station For people who can?t afford the ?100 -?125 pa For anyone who want to keep an old banger sitting on the road under a cover 1 hr CPZ is a no brainer It?s better for local people .. except the poor ?.. Maybe Southwark could subsidise the unemployed so they can park their BMW and Mercedes Convertibles for free??

peterstorm1985 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I wouldn't expect Southwark to be able to 'give' > away the freeholds because of the potential for > ongoing liability, and the precedent it sets, but > why can't they sell them for a nominal amount, eg > ?1, where there is a clear economic benefit to the > council to get rid of them for next to nothing. If > there is a business case, and there are > leaseholders prepared to purchase, surely there > must be a means to achieve it. The problems then would be that the housing officers would al leave the council as they wouldn't be getting the kick backs form the incompetent criminal contractors. This would mean that the real work the housing officers do for the benefit of the council would not get done. I?m joking But not about how the housing officers get kick backs from the contractors! The fear for the council is that by selling the freeholds where they still have a lease / council tenant is that they would be at the mercy of the management company and possibly they would get ripped off..... Comical as there is no way they would be getting a worst deal than the one they have right now.!!! By owning the freeholds themselves the council as I have explained above have their own staff costs (and surveyors responsible for selecting the contractors) who are almost all ripping the council freeholder off... and also ripping off anyone like ME and BUDDUG and all the other leasholders too. It's just another example of Council Jobs for the boys ....... a criminal situation..... The madness is that the freeholds have value on the open market there are companies and leaseholders who would pay good money for them and free the council from the cost.... but the system is setup for the employees of the council and the contractors to benefit rather than the leaseholders. It?ll never change so if you have the Council as the Freeholder then sell and buy elsewhere, and don?t buy in the first place. Southwark as the freeholder is the worst possible freeholder you could ever ever ever have. There?s no one who can do anything about it because there is nobody who will benefit by changing the system except the leasholders and they have Zero power. It's not a vote winner for James.... Is it James ? Utter Madness !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes Kid You just need to buy a bluetooth dongle. The dongle is plug and play... If it's modern ie less that 2 years old then it will 99.99999 % most likely have bluetooth built in.... unless it's a basic special ... first thing I would do is make sure it has all the drivers installed from the manufacturers web site before you go spending on a dongle... Chances are the previous owner didn't know what they were doing and it just needs the correct drivers. If not then you know you can get the dongle. Bluetooth is only any good for backing up old phones may as well get a modern phone with a mini usb connection if you want to do that available on ebay for 99p cheaper than a Btooth dongle. Technology hey great fun if you havn't got a clue....

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71, I'm glad to say that you're in a very > small minority if you believe that we should > demolish our cultural heritage and build on green > land. > > You've also been pretty poorly informed if you > think failing to do this is what caused the > housing crisis. If you believe this Cracking Crumbling Concrete Cancer excuse for a JOB for the boys is worthy of being part of our ?cultural heritage?. . . Then we?re all Fooked !!! If NOT (like me) then we?d all be in a far better place both at home and at work and with our hard earned tax money. FFS this has been a property crime ever since the day it was poorly built ?. IT is / will be a Monument to British housing INCOMPETENCE .. LOL

mind you for ?199 ie ?30 more you can get a new ASUS EeePC 1011PX http://www.simplyasus.com/ASUS_EeePC_1011PX-BLK069S_1156062.html

yes just buy a bluetooth usb dongle. Any laptop which hasn't got bluetooth is going to be old and not worth having unless you just want to surf the web slowly... depending on your budget.. and if you're ok with a small screen. might be better buying a new netbook like the asus 1001P ?170 http://www.simplyasus.com/GRADE_A_-_ASUS_EEE_PC_1001P_1157795.html you'll get a years warranty edit to correct 6 month warranty..

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you buy a laptop with mi bluetooth facility on > it, is it possible to buy some Bluetooth software > and a Bluetooth 'dongle' so you can access > bluetooth devices nearby ? > Or us it something fundamental which must be > installed during manufacture ? If you have a bluetooth device in your laptop you ill see it in cotrol panel devices... In windows go to Start > Control Panel > Click on Bluetooth Devices .... select the options you need ie make it discoverable etc and connect any bluetooth devices to your laptop by selecting search for devices etc....

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Other European countries take a different approach > of land taxes. You don't get land banks as as > result and people get on and use land. I 100% agree with you. We have bad system OMG 5,000 empty properties! A disgusting waste of resources and this concrete house is a prime example of all that is bad in our system. That together with council planning committees who insist on refusing planning redevelopment and restricting the development of the existing housing stock it?s no wonder that we have a lack of affordable housing. Contrary to popular belief we have the land, only not the intelligence to use what we have. Just look at the low rise nonsense which covers twice the amount of land needed to the benefit of nobody! The no go zone open spaces. Look nice but never used! All visual and not practicality well not for people / families ?.

Ah should never have been given the grading as it's a complete heap. (A monument to incompetence). I would love to see the council figures on cost etc once the deal is completed with a developer. (but we tax payers will never know the cost to us) I?d take a bet on it being a good few years before it adds anything to the housing stock of the borough. We?ve had to put up with the visual blight and empty plot for 13 years, how many more? Could well be a CRACKING (hoho) deal for someone. I think if I was a developer I wouldn't touch it with a mile long barge pole unless I got it cheap, and if I understand it the freeholder will get the market price. The real problem is that action was not taken years ago. Fingers crossed hey??

Ah Yes When it could have been knocked down and rebuilt to look identical, only without all the problems and flaws?? This is typical Upside-Down Council thinking at it absolute worst, WHY because they are spending our money and not their own! Anyone with half a brain and their own money would have demolished this heap of Historical Hysterical Incompetence 13 years ago and build in its place a robust cost effective development which would be designed to work for its inhabitants. Well at least it keeps Southwark (Dulwich Council lolls) planning departments ?Celia Isamajey? busy, Ah Excellent. Nice Paul Latham is busy too. Contractor Council will be busy charging like a Rhino! All that will = Poor value for our tax money, LOVELY>>>>>> So in summary Lets spend a huge amount (probably 10 X times more) to build some social housing. So that we can look at a building which can stand as a monument to how Drake didn?t know how to build in concrete! Comic Incompetence Endorsed by Comic Incompetent Southwak Council But that wouldn?t make a very interesting BBC program would it?. Hehehehehehehehehehe

stevo 1. Make sure it is only running one anti virus package. 2. Click Start > Run > and enter chkdsk.exe hit return and let it run. 3. run microsoft malitious software removal (free) http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/confirmation.aspx?id=16 4. check that is has all the upto date drivers by going to dell support. if all that fails then 5. reinstall the operating system with the disks unless you are lucky and it has a symantic reinstall on the drive you will need a set of dell discs. this link may help http://support.euro.dell.com/support/topics/global.aspx/support/kcs/document?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&docid=DSN_336966&isLegacy=true

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Loz Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > She might run, but the chances of her winning > > are > > > pretty much zero. > > > > I hope you're right ,,,, but just look at all > > those who voted for Ken ........ :) > > > Or worse, the bozos who voted for Boris. ah yes because boris is/has been worst for london that ken ever was the only bozos were those who voted ken in for the 2'nd time turkeys (bozos) voting for christmas ..... hohoho

-- moved topic --

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > She might run, but the chances of her winning are > pretty much zero. I hope you're right ,,,, but just look at all those who voted for Ken ........ :)

tomchance Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > fazer71 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Possibly the least Green MP I've ever come > across. > > She's not an MP, she's a London Assembly member. > > > Having seen her make NOT Green planning > decisions > > whilst on the Southwark Planning committee which > = > > twice the Co2 impact for another generation or > > two. > > Which would those be? > > Oh, and she is running, her web site is here: > http://www.jennyforlondon.org Mainly wanting New build over Regeneration / Refurbishment.

Possibly the least Green MP I've ever come across. Having seen her make NOT Green planning decisions whilst on the Southwark Planning committee which = twice the Co2 impact for another generation or two. Heaven help us if she becomes Mayor she?d be totally out of her depth. Truly cringe worthy.