Lowlander

I moved into a place a few years ago with no outdoor aerial and a sky dish. A £10 indoor aerial from Argos gives me all the channels (HD where available). Relatives in rural Scotland have freesat - useful where the internet is shite. I an area like Dulwich with reasonable internet - agreee, why!? I took the dish to the dump - questionable whether i would have got more than a fiver on eBay for it....

Also consider taxi to / from East Croydon to Dulwich - 20, 25 mins. Then train to / from East Croydon (every 5-10 mins, non-stop, journey time 15 mins, between £3.50 off-peak £5.70 peak, cheaper group fares). Way cheaper than a taxi the while way.

Dunno about über and all, but try Dulwich Cars or a local tfl registered minicab company? The former did courier a set of keys from Dulwich to Brent Cross a few years ago for £30 or so

Moovart Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anything metal usually gets picked up quickly by > scrap metal pickers from outside the front of your > house if you just leave it outside. This - I put a cheap metal bathtub outside my house on dunstans road in 2011 and watched it being picked up 20 minutes later

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is only ?10 a year though and it makes it > easier if you're not sure in certain > circumstances > > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I think it's a bit of a swizz that TfL charges > you > > to sign up for Autopay. If it were free, OP > could > > have just signed up for that, and if they got > > pinged, they wouldn't have to worry about > getting > > fined. This - my 20 year old diesel is liable for the ULEZ - agree in principle with ULEZ and reducing pollution - I've made dozens of short trips inside the ULEZ though and avoided the charge, whilst still paying it when driving it on major roads. ?10 is a cheap insurance policy.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is only ?10 a year though and it makes it > easier if you're not sure in certain > circumstances > > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I think it's a bit of a swizz that TfL charges > you > > to sign up for Autopay. If it were free, OP > could > > have just signed up for that, and if they got > > pinged, they wouldn't have to worry about > getting > > fined. This - my 20 year old diesel is liable for the ULEZ - agree in principle with ULEZ and reducing pollution - I've made dozens of short trips inside the ULEZ though and avoided the charge, whilst still paying it when driving it on major roads. ?10 is a cheap insurance policy.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lowlander Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Jacqui5254 Wrote: > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > *'Lordship Lane'...not sure which bit as > they > > try > > > not to show you more than your registration > > plate. > > > > By the junction with the south circular. The > > photos on my account show me next to a car with > > the driver on his mobile!! > > > > > Which side? The East Dulwich side as you wait to > turn right on the south circular towards Dulwich > Park? > > Would it pick you up if you were coming from the > Forest Hill direction and turning left? > > Asking for a friend 🤣 No this is southbound exiting Dulwich, I presume there is another one on the other side focussed on cars entering Dulwich. The south circular is outside the ULEZ so you can drive along it and not pay the charge if you come from outside.

Bumper delivery in upland road with a letter from 1 November. Still missing more recent stuff including bank cards

Jacqui5254 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks for this. I am trying my absolute best to > not drive the car I can't afford to replace but am > already ?50 in debt to TFL . > > *A215 Denmark Hill / A2216 Champion Park > > *Peckham Rye/East Dulwich Road > > *'Lordship Lane'...not sure which bit as they try > not to show you more than your registration plate. By the junction with the south circular. The photos on my account show me next to a car with the driver on his mobile!! Autopay is great though at least I?m getting some free trips

Sympathies. And good on the people who helped. Don't think about the people who did it and ran (or drove) way, they'll meet their end. And if you can, get back on your bike as soon as you can if you can. I was lucky enough to be able after a hit and run, but it took three months to get there! Chill out for a week if you can (no work) at least and don't worry.

rjsmall Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mark Rober has done a few iterations of fake > packages to catch out parcel thieves > That is beautiful

Our rear near side tyre was slashed about six years ago on upland road. The chap at Melbourne grove tyre place said he had seen a spate of them. Car at the time was a non descript 15 year old Ford parked in the same spot it usually was, not blocking anyone in. unlikely to have been a close neighbour!I think there was a thread on here at the time but can?t find it?

siousxiesue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A cut and paste from my Helen Hayes email, she has > forwarded the reply from train company > > > Thank you for your email. > > As you are aware, with constraints on day to day > crew availability, we are currently seeking to > find the balance between offering as many services > as possible, and ensuring that customers can rely > on their timetable. > > The London Bridge to London Victoria service group > was previously running in peak-hours only. This > group provides an 07:32 departure from West > Norwood. These services were changed as of 6 > September where a timetable change took place > across the Thameslink, Great Northern and Southern > network to prepare the network for the return of > schools and colleges. While relative to August, > approximately 180 more weekday services would run > per day as a result of these changes. However, to > achieve this change did involve the removal of > this service group. This is because train crew are > route and depot specific owing to training (e.g. a > Brighton Southern driver cannot drive a Southern > train in Crystal Palace), and at a time when day > to day availability of qualified crew is limited > by the effects of coronavirus, we have had to make > difficult choices as to how crews are allocated. > > The reason this design of timetable was chosen is > because it was very similar to the service that > ran in the Spring and Summer terms of 2021. We > therefore knew it would work for our schools and > colleges across the network and could be reliably > delivered. It was also a timetable that was > familiar to those such as key workers who were > commuting from February of this year. I have > provided a little more background on our crew > availability below for your reference, as > unfortunately, we are needing to make choices over > which services can run. This is driven by ensuring > that customers can rely on the services that are > in the timetable. > > We are making progress on returning qualified crew > to work. At present unavailability of qualified > crew is around 15%, better than the 20% in August, > but still slightly too high to run more services > reliably. In the next timetable change from Monday > 13 December, we are planning to reintroduce the > London Bridge to London Victoria service group in > peak hours, and increase the frequency of the > Beckenham Junction to London Bridge group via > Dulwich. This will mean an every 15 minute service > at busy times which should resolve these concerns. > Unfortunately we are not in a position to > introduce these services immediately, but the next > ten or so weeks provides the time to return more > crew to work, to provide the confidence that they > can be delivered reliably. As I am sure your > constituents will appreciate, the current service > is about trying to get the balance right between > offering as many services as possible and ensuring > that customers can rely on their timetabled > services, but I do recognise that this will > unfortunately mean less convenient journeys > through until December. Good news, that's a handy link to Clapham Junction for us close to Forest Hill station I've used in the past.

Still going...no lights on inside right now and at ?150 - ?200 a week generator hire this is a serious operation

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is very odd that nobody saw or heard his. > Perhaps someone did but company policy stops them > from interfering? What a shitehawk the thief is. Agree on the scumbag but to be fair to the company I wouldn?t challenge someone with an angle grinder! Commiserations it?s horrible having a bike stolen. What kind of lock was it? I always thought D-locks were the best? Also use bike register as that?s a serious deterrent

I?ve used https://www.redcorn.co.uk/ twice in the last ten years. They pick up the car with a transporter so no need for it to be running.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Malambu said: > > " I don't buy the "I need it just in case I have > to rush to A&E) as there will always be a helpful > neighbour, taxi, or push comes to shove an > ambulance". > > Absolute rubbish! how?

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It feels as though many of you are like Rip Van > Winkel and have slept through the last few years. > The ULEZ and likely extension were announced by > the previous Mayor, at a Guildhall event in 2015 - > https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/u > ltra-low-emission-zone I was there, and it has > been over six years coming. > > It was a surprisingly interventionist thing for a > Tory Mayor but essentially a pot shot at the > Cameron government who he considered should be > supporting Low Emission Zones, at a time when air > quality was lower priority/profile predating the > Supreme Court taking government to task and the VW > diselgate scandal. That said meeting European air > quality standards has been a manifesto commitment > for the last few governments. Labour would have > consulted on a national Low Emission Zone, DfT and > Treasury opposed this under the coalition, sad > that the Lib Dems didn't have more influence > here. > > The current Mayor brought the scheme forward, and > the extension to within the Circulars. There has > been extensive consultation on both the into of > the central scheme and the extension and I got a > leaflet through the post a few months ago. Most > shouldn't have an excuse for not knowing this was > coming months ago and deciding what to do about > it. > > We've had ANPR enforced schemes (congestion > charge, Outer London LEZ for heavy vehicles and > inner ULEZ) for some time so it is pretty proven > technology. > > I'd love to see evidence that successive > government's policies of reduced Excise Duty was > actually an explicit announcement that consumers > had to purchase diesel vehicles. I've never found > any - one of the government chief scientist spoke > about this but faith was put into effective > emission controls which failed in part as > manufacturers knew ways around this. Perhaps we > should consider manufacturers like the tobacco > industry in the 50s, but I am digressing. > > The decision to keep an older car, buy a newer > one, shift to bikes/public transport/car sharing > etc is a mix of a financial, convenience and > emotional one. > > Doing low mileage can be seen as either not a good > economic case to keep a car, or I am prepared to > pay a few hundred quid extra due to the > convenience (real or perceived). I don't buy the > "I need it just in case I have to rush to A&E) as > there will always be a helpful neighbour, taxi, or > push comes to shove an ambulance. > > Most of those doing larger mileages and regular > journeys will no doubt have already upgraded to a > newer car or use a lease scheme. I expect most of > the Chelsea tractors that many hate/consider an > unnecessary indulgence (and not afraid to include > me) are leased. > > Final point is I don't understand why people would > routinely drive to Dulwich park/court lane as it > is so near (there will always be exceptions) - > perhaps I read this on the anti LTN thread, some > threads seem to blend into one. Spot on.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "I?m genuinely interested in seeing it." > Lol > More sealioning Seems a reasonable request - if you have an argument, you have evidence. Otherwise all you have is meaningless and verbose language. To paraphrase, the last refuge of a scoundrel. There's 216 pages on this thread - you could provide the links afresh; otherwise you're not going to convince us newbies. Yu've got 330 followers on twitter and 216 pages on an obscure local forum...and you can do better than this.

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ulez-where-and-when?intcmp=54312 "...if you are parked within the zone but don't drive, you don't need to pay the ULEZ charge."

https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/environment/pollution-and-air-quality/mayors-ultra-low-emission-zone-london "You will not be charged for a non-compliant vehicle parked in the zone on days you don?t drive it."

No is only when you drive. Otherwise it would be 4,575 each leap year or 4,562.5 on non leap years.

They're certainly on all the junctions with the south circular from what I've read. There will be loads of local journeys you can make without getting caught, but they're so short that you may as well walk or cycle unless you can't. As with others we only use the car twice a month so paying the charge is still cheaper than buying a new car (our current one is only worth ?250). It does irk a little that these are long journeys out of London and only involve a half mile journey down Lordship Lane to the south circular, but will take it on the chin.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If only there was another route available, > something like a way through the village, which > would allow traffic to flow around this problem. > 🤔 Well there was when I went through about 9am. Pedestrians and cyclists were allowed through on the pavement. Sympathies to those who really needed to drive round.