Siduhe

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Library, bus shelters, noticeboards, town crier, > skywriting - all way cheaper than a magazine. But > your comment increases my interest in how much > that website costs. Maybe put in an FOI request for the website costs if you really want to know? The Library, bus shelters, noticeboards, town crier and skywriting won't reach a certain part of the Southwark population in the way the magazine does - the housebound grandpa for example, or the non-english speaking recent immigrant. Not disagreeing with you that it costs too much for the value it delivers, but explaining why it's considered an effective solution.

I also find Southwark Life pretty useless - however, I accept and understand that it's not aimed at me. All local councils have a statutory obligation to inform residents about services, policies and decisions including providing information that allows people to have their say and get involved. It's not enough to have information available about the services there for anyone who asks - they actually have to go out and tell people about them. They also have to do that in a way that makes the information available to the widest possible group of people of all ages, ethnic backgrounds and types. So Southwark can't just put service info on a website - that may be fine for the younger generation, but not so good for the older generation. They can't just put out the info in English - they have to let people know they can get info in a wide variety of languages and so on. I understand why Southwark Life is seen an easy solution - it goes to everyone in the borough regardless of who they are. Maximum opportunity to get the info in front of the people who need it. However, the downside is that the info also goes out to a lot of people who don't need it - hence the massive wasted cost. So the question Joani asks is exactly the right one, IMHO - how do you proactively get information about council services out to the people who need it most, when you don't know who they are or what their needs are? Surgeries are no good - if someone has no idea a council service exists, they don't know to go to a surgery and ask about it. Posters around the borough might be a good idea - but you can only advertise one service per poster. One solution might be to stop delivering Southwark Life to every home in the borough, but to make it available in other council buildings, housing offices etc - but that then assumes the only people who need to know about council services are those who are already in need of them. Would be genuinely interested to know what people think can replace Southwark Life but still meet the Council's duties.

Narnia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ....a myriad perhaps? Or is it a myraid? Maenad, perhaps?

Here are two links. If you are searching for "K&O" this may not work because of the way the forum software seems to interpret the ampersand (&). Search for pest control instead maybe? http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,406824,406824#msg-406824 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?29,412019,412059#msg-412059

Is the Forest Hill pool open again? Last I heard it was still being refurbished.

Thanks James, the freehold issue was sorted in early 2008 under RTM legislation, but as you say, at no small cost. The company I worked for at the time gave pro-bono advice to some of the mock-goth owners, which is how I know a little bit about it.

JBARBER Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The existing 'mock goth' house is being treated as > a seperate property and not connected with this. > Its owned by diferent parties now. They were > promised various car parking in the concrete house > grounds which clearly will never happen. > From the little I know, the people who own flats in the new "mock goth" ended up going through a very protracted battle to force the owner to sell the freehold to them so they could manage the building themselves, after receiving massive service charge demands which related to the need to maintain the concrete house. The owner and his business partner also tried what sounds to be a similar tactic, saying that the owner could not be contacted to serve papers and the business partner did not have the authority to deal with the property, to hold up the process. Some of the flat owners said in submissions to the LVT that they had been supplied with inaccurate documentation, including formal documents and letters purportedly from the council (I'm wording that more cautiously than they did) about what facilities would be put on site when they purchased their flats. They were also told the concrete house would be restored, rather than knocked down and more flats built. As Mr Barber says, buyer beware, but if you ask the right questions and get the right answers (supported by documents) and then spend the next four years trying to recover the situation, it's a tough break.

My understanding is that 350 MPs have been asked to make repayments (some more may have repaid voluntarily?). However, the majority of repayments are being sought because the expenses were not "specific and proportionate expenditure...needed for the performance of Parliamentary duties". Not because they weren't technically permitted under the then existing rules. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8496729.stm

TE44, the answer you quote above appears to relate to an FOI request for communications between Research Councils (Research Councils UK?) and an arm of the government, relating to health policy and funding. If that is indeed a response to the question "how many children have been awarded damages through the government's vaccine damage scheme" - I would be complaining to the ICO that the reason given has no relation to the actual request. The ICO's website also doesn't carry any decisions relating to the actual vaccine damage scheme that I see (although there are lots of appeals against refusals of requests to provide more general info relating to vaccines and health policy). There is however a very similar request made in 2008 here: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mmr_vaccine_injury_compensation?unfold=1#incoming-1543 The response to this is that "There have been 5485 claims made since the Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme commenced and 927 have resulted in an award. There have been 1303 claims received since 01/01/2000, 24 of which have been successful." Does that help? The original requestor also asked for a breakdown of sums received by successful claimants, but this could not be provided apparently because the VPU does not collate this info. Hope this helps.

What PGC said - also responsible for me learning a great new word: "perigee", as in "The moon is so bright because it's at its closest perigee to earth"...

NickW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- ...I don?t condone the actions of the dropper - however all too often mum?s like ryedalema think they have a divine right to the pavement, doorways and what ever else... I'm pretty sure I would also feel I had a "divine right" for people not to walk into my home unless I have invited them. In fact, I think I would be quite intimidated if a strange (as in unknown) man pushed past me as I was walking out of my home, into my hallway. I'm sure there was no harm intended and he probably thought it was a communal hallway, but it would still make me feel uncomfortable.

Slightly off topic, but I have read a number of times that studies suggest people who break the "small laws" (i.e. fare dodging) are much more likely to be also breaking some of the "bigger laws" (drug dealing/carrying concealed weapons). I don't know how true that is, but it may explain why the two go hand in hand. For myself, I have found the similar searches at Peckham Rye inconvenient at best and intrusive at worst - right up until a guy about three in front of me tried to push past the people checking tickets, then tried to do a runner from the police and was found to be carrying a kitchen knife down his jeans. No idea what the story was (happened several months ago), but made me think.

Dress up as a journalist (hat, mac, press pass, notepad etc) and say you are from Associated Press?

Rogue in X-Men (as played by Anna Paquin)? Norman Bates in Psycho (as played by Anthony Perkins)? Or is that cheating?

Nice attitude, particularly to someone who's simply trying to assist you. My understanding is that this forum is for issues which are specific to life in East Dulwich. The Lounge or the Drawing Room are for issues which are of more general interest. The Thameslink service is a more general topic, although it obviously affects people in ED. I'm not an admin, I was just suggesting why one of them might have moved it.

It's in the Lounge - presumably because it's not a ED specific topic.

What time did you travel this morning? I caught the 7.50 from ED to London Bridge and the platform was fine to move around on. There was some ice at the bottom of the ramp up to the platform (not on the station land, but on the street part) but the path up seemed again ok to me. Mind you, I was wearing boots with a tread which may have had an impact and/or travelled later than you?

Here you go: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,376077,376077#msg-376077

fractionater Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So if I want to travel from ED to London Bridge > with my Oyster PAYG, do I have to touch in at ED? Yes, you need to touch in at both ends of the journey - if you only touch in at LB when you exit through the barriers, you get charged the max daily fare (as the Oyster does not know where you started your journey).

A lot of the problems seemed to be bus related. Two buses broken down on the steep bit of Forest Hill Road caused a lot of the problems that side of LL - smelled a lot like one of them had a burnt out clutch from tackling the ice and failing. Same problem at Elephant and Castle and OKR (broken down buses).

Discussion here: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,377783

I was due to receive a new credit card in the post at the end of September. I'd asked the bank to send it to a branch rather than my home, but they didn't for some reason. When it didn't arrive, I cancelled the card and got a new one sent to the branch assuming it had been diverted somehow. The missing credit card arrived three days ago - almost exactly two months after it was sent. No sign it was tampered with at all - just took that long to arrive.

bumpkin, you may find reporting it on the online tree problem form gets faster results - Southwark were very responsive when a neighbour's tree started blocking walking access on the pavement near our house. https://securesite.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=281

Not unless she's also a nutrional therapist on the side (as well as being a web designer)... On topic, is this Riverford as in the vegetable box people?

SteveT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did you know that if you invite your lover to live > in your home, within only 6 months, they have > rights to your property. People don't get property rights just by moving in with someone. However there are circumstances where a cohabiting couple can be ordered by the Court to share in a property in various proportions, depending on how long they have been together and what each have contributed to the home and the relationship. If an unmarried couple buy their home in joint names, there is a case that says the presumption is that they own it in equal shares - but that presumption can also be overruled by the Court.