KidKruger

Just gotta count those postal votes. Gonna get messy perhaps.

Was he with Steven ?

businesses

couldn't it be that thieves broke the lock and another person who uses the locker had a replacement padlock. Or.. someone using the bike locker had the key and just stole the bike before locking-up again ?

So, even worse, then. Not only was it a stupid idea, it was done for political point scoring. The people living in the city and subject to the impacts of these decisions not even figuring in the consideration. Nice.

Aaah... but how are they doing over in Elsie, Melbourne, Carlton, Court, etc ?

looks like you got an early-bird discount John ! JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The one place you can write what you want is your > tombstone > > https://imgur.com/gallery/yBj0a

DKHB - who cares, it was a stupid idea regardless.

Good question JohnL. Also, I know people who have sold their older cars BECAUSE of this proposed extension to the ULEZ (I think it was previously planned for this October 2020). One could celebrate an older car being taken off the road, but having to borrow money to upgrade a car which worked perfectly well then finding it wasn't after all necessary doesn't seem so funny to them.

FTG - That's because they do not support your businesses. They prefer a quiet traffic-free precinct (in Zone 2), if it costs a few businesses they do not care. Please don't expect support from these local residents because it's a hiding to nothing. "This does not come over as supportive of business."

I'm just being cheeky - but you probably know that x

I'm doing this soon. Isle of Wight. (Isle of 'White')

heartblock - such a disparity. It's galling.

Wow that's simply insane. Anybody here think this change is good - even a DV resident ?! Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But Ex- the council appears to view the ETROs as a > licence for stupidly...take a look at the > attached...who thought this was going to be a good > solution at the DV/EDG junction? You can only > presume the person who planned this is 1) really > stupid or 2) looking for ways to create so much > congestion that people choose another route. > > Who would have had to have signed this off? There > appears to have been gridlock in DV today as a > result - who is being held to account? We keep > hearing from councillors let it bed in, we need > time to assess but in my mind if the council > continues to do things like the attached they > should lose the power to do this. > > Any sane person can look at that photo and predict > what will happen - you don't have to be a planning > genius to see what will happen. This is why the > council are under so much pressure and why the > majority of residents are up in arms about these > closures - they're just stupid.

Good luck out in the wilderness.. Maybe start a forum there ?

"No extension to Congestion Charge Zone." Thank heavens, what an insane proposal that was !! Amongst all this BS with road closures and war on cars (you can pay the road tax but not use the roads, unless you're posh).

I'm not sure we are actually in the middle of the pandemic, it could go on for years, meaning we're actually just at the start.

DIY

Oh yeah - like "offence by proxy" !! Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > it's funny that it's an observer complaining. Who > knows what the guys skipping and the woman with > the baby had going through their mind. > > He was probably counting and she was possibly not > in the slightest bothered that she couldn't walk > in a straight line. > > Most people are nice, tolerant and a bit more > chilled out.

Unfortunately Rockets, your questions won't be 'answered' properly, because the truth is a single "because we were trying to force-through what we decided to implement and didn't want any distractions to stop it, including stakeholders and dependents". You are (correctly) applying logic and accepted procedure to a disingenuous approach, so there will be mismatches which cannot be explained without exposing corruption. Democracy. Street Level.

Ooh I'm intrigued.. Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At least the ones trying to flog the terrible > "art" don't seem to come round any more!

Thanks kristymac. I presume this is the pre "controlled explosion" photo, perhaps after the device had been discovered ? Looks like the pin had deteriorated or been removed (meaning it was faulty/benign) and those weights added. Maybe the controlled explosion was a standard procedure just in case. MarkT - never heard of grenades being used as tank weights, unreal ! kristymac1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > KidKruger Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > A hand grenade got into the water tank in > > someone's loft ? > > (I'm sure I haven't grasped the correct detail > > yet...!) > > Thats about the gist of it

A hand grenade got into the water tank in someone's loft ? (I'm sure I haven't grasped the correct detail yet...!)

Nope. Must every remaining drop of joy be regulated and diminished ?

So the fines came a few days after my OP, two - for Congestion Charging (CC) and ULEZ. ?80 each. There was an option to make a 'representation' as to why the fines should not be imposed. Both rejected my separate representations which included a marked map of exactly where we drove, proof of where we were heading and the appointment we made that day, and explanation around the signs not being obvious to follow. They said I could appeal. I followed the appeals procedure and basically repeated what I had said in the representations, for both CC and ULEZ. I also asked for a copy of their signage standards, evidence that they had adhered to their own standards for this particular diversion, an FOI request of PCNs issued by that camera on the day we were 'caught' for an hour before and after our 'offence', plus same PCN information for the prior 51 Saturdays (so I can see the comparison between PCNs during diversion and before diversion). Couple of weeks later I received court dates (Nov) for both. The FOI feedback showed a 10x increase in PCNs on the day I was 'caught' compared to your average / non-diversion Saturday during same period. I have now received confirmation both of the PCNs will be dropped "because we do not enforce PCNs when a diversion was the cause of the alleged offence" (even though they both rejected my initial representation which had exactly same content as my appeal request). One has to wonder how much additional money in total that camera, and other cameras in the same area of the CC zone, made for TfL. I am now invoicing both CC and ULEZ for my time.