Lowlander

Why not just go up Lordship Lane and left into Crawthew? Problem solved!

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And I'd rather be stuck behind one of these on the > roads than the diesel old versions. Those old diesels (assuming you mean the old routemasters) were actually more environmentally friendly than the new buses, having been fitted in the early 2000s with modern, fully EURO compliant engines. They were also lighter and more fuel efficient - and cheaper to run - than their replacements.

Michael Palaeologus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The noise has not got worse. I've lived round here > since 1988 and the numbers have not increased > appreciably. > > Concorde was loud as a loud thing and was > beautiful as it flew over. People stopped to gaze > at it as it passed over. > > To claim that any of the planes flying over my > flat as I type is anywhere near as loud as > Concorde is a fantasy. > > Concorde had the same turbo-jets as the Vulcan > bomber (RR Olympus) they were designed when noise > was never an issue of concern. The Olympus was > first run in 1950. Things have moved on a little > since then noise-wise. Concorde was unable to fly into New York initially because of noise concerns. Even when finally allowed, BA/AF had to alter the approach and speed.

Saffron Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MichelleT Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Took my baby home in a cab in a sling. Kings > were > > a bit weird about it initially, until I pointed > > out that I could always walk. Then they said it > > was up to me. > > > I often wondered about this, but in the end we > never came to the circumstance where we needed it. > Do you just thread the seatbelt under the sling > (ie, seatbelt between you and Baby)? So > presumably in event of a collision, the seatbelt > holds you in place, and the sling holds baby in > place over you? Under the sling - if over and in an accident, you'll crush the poor thing to death with all your weight multiplied by the speed. Personally in London with speeds less than 30mph I'm happy to carry the baby in the back of minicabs or black cabs with my arms. Perfectly legal until they are three years old.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Clearly it'll be harmful to those it causes stress > to and harmless to those it doesn't. > We're all wired differently. > > Penguin's post is spot on. > > For those who find it problematic there are three > choices. > > 1) get some help to learn to cope with it, CBT > seems sensible. > 2) leave East Dulwich for somewhere not under a > flight path. > 3) pop yourself in a cryogenic freeze with > instructions not to be thawed until sea levels > have risen enough that Heathrow is no longer > viable, or we have passed peak oil and plane > travel has priced out joe public and we now take > boats and zeppelins to get about (although we > might have run out of helium too) or anti gravity > or transporters have been discovered making for > noise free travel. > > Anything else is howling at the moon really, > traffic to Heathrow is only going up from > hereonin. CBT may not work, there may be millions of people needing therapty/councilling for some deep-seated childhood trauma leading to them becoming sensitive to aeroplane noise. Or foxes. Or the inability to stop trolling. And the howling is effective, or we'd have at least five runways and nightflights at Heathrow...

The point is that London is one (the only?) major city in the developed world where aeroplane noise is such an issue. There is a volume of documented evidence that this is harmful to health. There is also a volume of criticism of this evidence, fuelling a healthy debate. It is not clear cut and it's infantile to dismiss the argument based on the fact that you're immune to the noise. Whilst there's a small minority who enjoy it (see smoking crack and drinking meths), there's also a large number of people who find it a nuisance. BTW, I must blank the noise of foxes, to me they are seen and not heard.

Risk averse? Follow the majority advice and pay down the morgage - way better returns than the stockmarket at ?1500 guaranteed a year. Imagine if you'd invested in the FTSE100 in 2000/2008? You'd have made nothing (and probably lost through charges). If you do fancy some risk, put ?5k on the stockmarket, but do some research first....

I suspect that information could be found here http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/tickets/faresandtickets/farefinder/current

And that's why this country has gone to the dogs. I've been commuting using TfL for decades; they've always run a full service on full working days. Apart from the NOrthern Line closure in 2000 or so which was massively advertised.

Well I've been taking the 0730ish train for the best part of a year (and a return one in the evening peak). And there's nothing at Peckham Rye or Canada Water to suggest that there would be closures over Christmas.

Arrived at Peckham Rye this morning expecting to board the eastbound 0729 Overground service...to find all LO seviecs cancelled, and station announcements saying that this had been well advertised in advance with posters "dotted around the station". Glad to see by the reaction of others on the platform that I was not alone in being completely unaware of this mythical campaign.

The time to speculate was in the past on this one. It's not transparent (shadowy founder), the Chinese Government have just banned conversion to RMB within China, and the volatility is horrendous. Save your cash for the next virtual currency like Litecoin or NameCoin. Lastly, if you see a gravy train, it's usually too late to board...

I cross that road daily, so many impatient motorists race through after the light has changed to red. Police could make a small fortune during rush hour. But yes, many people misunderstand box junctions.

Ouch. I would give them a call and explain your situation (and that's it's Christmas, kids's presents etc.), you may get somewhere. Otherwise, for the amount involved, you have to ask whether it's worth your time trying to recover ?50, and put it down to experience...

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The intended change in charges was announced on 5 > June 2013. Are London police still using outdated > forms and amending them manually? Has this been a > common practice? Is there any knowledge of > guidance they've been given on making the > amendments, or on explaining them at the time to > recipients? > > Are the court fixed penalty clerks aware of the > manual amendments to the forms? Do they receive > copies of the notices as amended? > > How did the penalty clerk's office respond to the > receipt of the ?60 cheque? On the first point it's common for out of date forms to be issued and endorsed as applicable, this is better than wasting taxpayer's money throwing old forms away and printing new ones every time a detail needs to be changed. As long as the endorsement is clear legal precedent suggests this is acceptable. The other two points are valid, although this is a criminal fine where sillywoman has accepted a fixed penalty as an option to being prosecuted in court, so unlike a parking ticket which is a civil offence. If you don't agree with the fine it there is no official appeal process other than court...which is a risky strategy! The unanswered question is why she didn't query the amount when paying in the first place, a ?90 bet with short odds.

sillywoman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks Otta, Lowlander I didn't ask the officer > because I didn't look at the ticket (given at the > side of the south circular, in rush hour and I was > quite embarrassed) until I got to work. It was > only then that I realised that the ticket is for > ?60, but he'd crossed the figure out & written > ?100 over it. > > Can I ask what you mean about the officer 'clearly > endorsing' the ticket? Do you mean it's legal for > him to write a new figure over the top of the > figure printed. I did look on the internet but > couldn't find the answer to this question - it > doesn't appear to be on the link you've posted > either - unless it's staring me in the face & I'm > just missing it somehow. Fair enough I can see why you didn't check the ticket there and then under those circumstances. What I mean is, if you put yourself in the position of a Judge/Jury, you'd ask why you'd seemingly ignored the ?100 and just paid the ?60? The Police website seems to agree with this https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q530.htm Give them a ring and see if they'll back down over the phone, otherwise I would write it off as an expensive mistake. The alternative is to go to court and risk a fine of up to ?1k.

Why did you not (a) ask the police officer and (b) search the internet - taken me 0.27 seconds to find this https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q203.htm Normally I'd suggest appealing but in this case the officer has clearly endorsed the ticket...

We have an old Victorian house, thermostat is set to 18C in mornings and evenings but heating only comes on around mid-October and off mid-March/April. Make sure it goes off when you're not around. Get some thick curtains and rugs, insulation under the ground floor directly under the floorboards, but with space for air to cirulate underneat that. Avoid using electric to heat wherever possible, and as others say only heat the rooms you use. Our gas is around ?40 per month for heating and hot water, electric about ?30 - do a comparison on uswitch or similar we save ?100s that way.

Why single this poor chap out? What about all the other tree-sellers? If you feel so strongly about it buy them a tree yourself!

Love_London Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I experienced a nightmare commute this morning > (and yesterday) on the Overground from Honor Oak > Park to Canada Water. > I was squashed so hard that I almost could not > breathe!!! > > Has it been this bad all along or do you feel that > it's gotten worse recently? > > It would really help if they run more frequent > service at least during the peak hours. > Do you know who we need to raise/escalate this to > so that we can ask for a more frequent service? > > Also, the escalator at Canada Water station to > Jubilee line..... > I wonder why they cannot use both escalator so > that they go down rather than one up and one down > in the morning. > > At the moment, the commute is just about bearable > but I am concerned that it will get worse as more > and more people are moving into the FH and HOP > area... It's run by London Overground...so you could ask them? Given that some stations on the line (Canada Water being one) can only take four coach trains, and it would cost hundreds of millions to extend them. And I doubt there's capacity on the main lines for more trains anyway. You could scrap the always-empty New Cross trains though. Where are all these flats/houses being built in FH/HOP?

?57 for a candle?! You can buy a pack of 20 for ?4.50 from Ikea. Now I've heard it all...the true middle-class household reeks of mildewed copies of the Guardian and stewed beans, not poncy scented candles...

You can run electrics to a shed/greenhouse so no planning issues (just make sure you get a qualified sparky to install, who may employ a builder to dig the cable trench). Water and drainage ditto. The problems start when/if it becomes residential...

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > EDherb Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Yes the police caught him (aged 15) - someone > > > spotted him at it and called them. > > > > > > What a waste of time and money - we were > badly > > > scratched and facing a chunky insurance claim > > and > > > unwelcome excess...! > > > > Surely if the Police caught him, you have a > case > > for his parents to pay up for the damage? At 15 > he > > is still a minor and their responsibility. > > > > Wishful thinking perhaps, but better than > seeing > > your insurance premium go up next renewal! > > Problem is that such incidents reflects likely > behaviour in the area. > Insurance companies base their rates on an area to > area basis. > > This is Not an isolated incident. > A while back one night several cars had their wing > mirrors kicked off on Whateley Road. > > There have been several incidents of cars being > broken into here on EDF. > I would imagine only a fraction of incidents are > reported here. > > Late night opening of bars would seem to be > responsible for more late night revelry. > > Although in this instance at 15 I suppose he will > get a slap on the wrist.. (No. Cannot do that any > more) > > Unlikely to go any further and we all get to pay > higher premiums on our insurance. > > Hopefully it will stay on his record so that when > he is old enough to have his own car he will not > be able to find anyone to insure him. > > DulwichFox Insurance Companies don't ask what's on your criminal record. In any case, if it precludes him from getting a job, that's only going to further marginalise him. What he needs is a good length of community service and some life coaching, or the death sentence, depending on your point of view.

They're really useful, I lived next door to one in Battersea on a nice street near a school, good neighbours and would accept any parcels/recorded mail for me when I was at work. If it's more than a few doors away then obviously they'd be no use to you. But then you'd probably not even notice it exists.

I got a number 40 from the Library, was pretty packed from the beginning but still had room until halfway down LL. How on earth did people further down fare? They must have been waiting for hours. Those outside the station looked pretty fed up.