Jeremy

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tonight: > Fury v Hammer You sure about that?

Yeah I think second hand is best (as long as it's not an ex fleet or hire car), for the depreciation alone. I would have thought you should be looking at quite a bit less than 8K for a three year old Fiesta with < 30K miles.

Maybe just take the kids to the pub garden instead. Surely people wouldn't complain then. Oh, hang on..

Ms Blueberry's original post was rather over-the-top, but nevertheless I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to prevent their properties falling into complete decay. "not derelict"? Well it bloody looks it, and has done for at least 15 years. If I lived nearby it would bother me. And if I was the owner/tenant/landlord/greedyrelative/etc, I would be embarrassed. If it really is a penniless little old lady living there, then why not ask for some volunteers to tidy it up?

YellowRose - fair enough. Personally I wouldn't automatically label someone as greedy, self centred, or indeed a prick without knowing the circumstances, but hey... this is the EDF and judgemental attitudes are rife. I'm not totally against back garden development (potentially less harmful than the blocks of small 2 bed flats we've seen in recent years) but cases probably need to be judged objectively on a case-by-case basis.

I know very little about cars, but out of interest - have you actually noticed braking issues (e.g. locking up when braking) or just a warning light? In my experience warning lights on the dash usually seem to be simple sensor failures.

I don't necessarily agree that having a drink while looking after kids is irresponsible. One beer on a sunny day isn't going to kill anyone. I don't think that drinking alcohol is something that needs to be hidden away from children. However, I would probably agree with a glass ban.

It's either allowed or it's not... TBH personal circumstances of the applicants shouldn't be relevant.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No one goes on about having a good breakfast in > Johnnies Caf?. Same reason nobody goes on about K&W. Because it's bog standard.

Just to check we're on the same page, Fox... you are suggesting that people go to these restaurants primarily to be seen in the "right place"?

I think in SE22 the EDT is about as good as it gets pub-wise... what makes you think you're going wrong, Fox?

Tanning studio for kids - Ray Parlour Junior

I thought "IT'S MCDONALDS" was supposed to indicate that McD's is generally crap and you shouldn't go in there even if the coffee is OK.

What are you talking about?

I would agree that sitting in a McD's is rarely a relaxing or pleasant experience, but if you just want to grab a quick coffee to takeaway (and maybe a couple of big macs and an apple pie while you're there!) I don't see the problem.

> running up a staggering $29 million in credit card charges to help fuel his > extravagant lifestyle, which included a pricey Trump Tower apartment for his cats. Surprised you didn't mention that bit..

Neither "coloured", "black", or "of colour" are intrinsically offensive words, it all depends on context. People need to focus on the gist of what is being said rather than getting hung up on specific words. And one or two people getting all worked up doesn't necessarily make something offensive.

Who can we contact to arrange some window etching street art along Lordship Lane? Who are the prominent artists of this exciting new genre?

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ha ha ha... > > *reels in* Ah c'mon... was hoping you'd engage me in an argument at least.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I bought a Mac Book Air specially for it > too many sales reps on nasty company laptops)or any of that ilk Apple victim...

MarkT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the point here is that there is a planning > application in process, so the trees on the site > are in effect under temporary protection. I didn't realise that was a rule. If so... what's to stop the owner just removing the trees before applying for planning?

katgod - maybe it's just too small?

Even the middle classes need to go to B&Q sometimes.

Yes, it appears to have become something called "Domino's Pizza". Presumably a poncified posho cheese-on-toast emporium catering to the blow-in middle classes and their pampered offspring.

MarkT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In this case the proposal includes the removal of > 3 trees, so arguments against their removal are > valid. I'm sure it's a legitimate concern. But I think you're misunderstood my point... if they're not protected by a TPO then there's nothing you can do. The owner could cut them down today if they wanted.