SteveUK1978

Clearly an emotive issue so not trying to make light of it at all - but I suspect the ?16m arrears has not arisen since April '13 when the "bedroom tax" was introduced which was implied in the first response to the OP.

Well the good news Mikeb is that technology advances mean that newer aircraft such as the A380 are already much quieter than the older long haul planes (like the 747s that will be prevalent at that time of the day) so over time, it should be quieter not noisier than now. There is some chat on the Heathrow website about it all if you want to look into it.

Once Crossrail comes to Woolwich, you can be in the West End in 20 mins from there....

Not on a lead though is it Lane Lover.....

There will be plenty of posts that pick apart your story, pull you up on loose language around being "attacked" etc....but the facts are, people are supposed to have their dogs on leads other than the exercise area (pretty clearly marked) but hardly anyone does. Not going to change unless the council start enforcing it - which they won't.

Don't mention Iceland?.....it was their banks that caused this whole damn mess.

Yes, Forest Gate is rough. Sure with Crossrail etc it will change in time (like ED has) but it's got a long way to go.

I won't put my hand up for that one! As this thread has re-appeared, just to add that all the builders stuff that was cluttering the road has now all gone and there is no sign of anyone on the site a few weeks now. They were pumping water out of the site for a few days and I wonder whether it has all been put on hold as the site cannot be worked on due to the wet?

We went for Sunday lunch at the Dulwich Wood House pub yesterday - I would categorise that as out of the way as well, but it was packed. A big, family friendly pub would probably still work on that site if there was a nice big beer garden for the summer and a decent car park as it couldn't rely on passing footfall. Still think a hotel would be better there.

I'm convinced a hotel would do really well in the area (not quite sure the East Dulwich Hotel near The Actress counts), this would be the perfect site if there is adequate parking. If I had a spare ?5m, I would be all over it.

Call the estate agent and get them to take it down. It is their sign, they normally deal with it.

The only downside with City is that you can get bad delays in the winter (mainly) - last year I was stuck there all day waiting for a flight to Amsterdam (50 min flight time!) due to very localised fog which is apparently quite common. LHR and LGW flights left just fine on the same day. Much easier airport to navigate and get away from when it does work mind you.

** Arming flame thrower ** Worldwiser: Surely a lawyer will charge extra for an escrow - you would need documentation (even if the escrow agreement is standard) and admin by the law firm to manage it. That would be an ancillary service for UK conveyancing lawyers surely? Anyway, I don't have an issue with additional security this method provides in a transaction...but my sense in this market, it is sellers who tend to shaft the buyers - not the other way around. All well and good asking your buyers to put money is escrow, but back to my original question, as a seller do you offer exclusivity to them when you demand the deposit and if so, do you repay the buyers costs if you then pull out? I would say that sellers don't need that much protection in this market.

What assurances do you offer the buyer in exchange for their deposit?

?40k paid off your mortgage at 3.9% would save you ?1,500 a year in interest - certainly tangible.

This may help.... Then again, perhaps not.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We have had no "on-demand" service for two days > now. > > New Year resolution - dump Richard Branson. Branson beat you to it David, he dumped Virgin Media long ago and it was sold to a US buyer earlier this year for many billions.

Evidence? Classic. There are a few witnesses on this forum who may be willing to take the stand. With regards to the "illegal" objects parked on the street - well they are sat there...not sure what more evidence you need?

We have just had an email response to the complaint we made to the council regarding the road closure order. In line with the above they have confirmed that the order allows for closure 3 times a day (10am, 12pm & 3pm), for 30 mins max per time. What is more surprising is that the order was only issued after the council was made aware of the "illegal" road closures being undertaken by the developers and staggeringly the "materials, containers and skips" on the public carriageway and footways were previously unlicensed and also (in their words), "illegal". The response implies that these have now been licensed, but it seems they have been parking their skips, storage areas and the jumbo-sized toilet for almost 12 months without council approval to do so. This whole thing just amazes me. Anyway, they say expected completion date is June 2014, so I guess we only have to endure this for another 6 months......

Currently stranded again at London bridge - 1 min early would be a nice problem to have.

What offends me Jimmyraj is the fact that it will have been going for 2 years by the time they finish this. It's a tiny plot with virtually no access from the road (it's like a wedge shape, with the narrow point on the road) which means all their kit & debris just lives on the street and has done for 12 months already. A pool on a site like this is crazy - yeah good for the owner, sure it adds a lot of value - but the complexity of the project has subjected a lot of people to some major inconvenience.

Thanks James. It still remains a baffling situation, but perhaps not as bad as first expected. They have been closing the road on and off for a while now by just sticking cones in the way to force people down Frogley Road and I guess this notice just lets them do that "legally" if that is the correct term. You have to laugh at the fact they got the name of the road wrong in the notice. I see they have also put a notice on one of the lamp posts - it is a bit of laminated paper, smaller than A4 size and about 7 ft up so it is not exactly the most obvious....but I guess it ticks a box.

All - James' comment about the 15 mins, 3 times a day closure has been confirmed to our neighbour by someone at the council. She called up and had a call back from a contact of her's at Southwark. Perhaps not as bad as feared if that is true and she is supposedly going to be sent an email from the council clarifying the point. Maybe we can turn our attention to getting the Davlav removed too!

No it's not a large plot - it's just a huge deep hole being dug and they have been removing soil for the best part of 12 months already - dumping it in a huge skip as Reg says. The oversized skip and the deluxe workman's hut complete with double ensuite bathroom and kitchen facilities has been taking up 4 or 5 parking spaces all year too. The owner must have a friend on the planning committee as it is a staggering amount of disruption that clearly is about to get worse.

Reading the guidance to the Road Traffic Act now, it seems like they can (at the council's discretion, without consultation given that it is temporary) although they are supposed to suitably inform those parties impacted. I am not sure hey have done that. I'm off work today - I will speak to the site manager who seems ok to be fair and see what the actual impact is likely to be. They do close the road from time to time when they have big trucks on site (a previous post complained about that), it could be they have this in place to allow them to do that when they need to - not 100% of the time. ...but it is still nuts they can do this.