Siduhe

Asset Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've been listening to R4 over the internet for > about 4 years so it's not that recent. Absolutely - but I'm guessing using an .asx stream via the BBC website? Or Realplayer? So, via a computer. What the BBC has recently done is open up a .mms stream, which means you can plug it into something like the Roku or Squeezebox and listen without having to have a PC on at the same time. Big plus (for me at least) as it's much more like using a radio proper.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: > I'm b*&&?red when analogue finally goes - how do I > get my radio fix? I have a similar problem with radio, and now only use internet based radio. Your PC will do it and there are also standalone internet radio boxes that will connect to a wireless network - a bit overpriced at the moment, but coming down all the time, so by the time analogue radio goes off you'll be sorted. :)-D http://www.broadbandstuff.co.uk/product_info.php?products_id=503 The big issue in the past has been the BBC who wouldn't transmit their main stations in mp3 or compatible stream format, so products like this could use them. They've recently changed their policy so I can now get Radio 4 over the internet.

AllforNun Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well apparently I have it from a v good source > that the leasholders are in very advanced > discussions with a firm called Mark One. I think > they are a clothing retailers ? Its basically a > done deal. I think East Dulwich will be looking > pretty smart in a few years. I guess you've not wandered past the shop window of the one in Forest Hill then... :) Mrs Kford is spot on. I've never once walked past the one in Forest Hill and thought "I must pop in". That said, I don't imagine it will cause the ire that White Stuff did, and it's a whole lot more accessible in terms of pricing than some of the clothes-selling emporiums on LL.

One thing I forgot to mention, in fairness to Southwark Council, is that part of the reason they may be being a bit heavy handed, is that their waste management strategy doesn't involve building a big old incinerator to treat waste, as a number of councils are. The strategy only works, however, if Southwark hit fairly ambitious targets for recycling. If they were being a bit more relaxed about the recyling and going down the incinerator route, I suspect people would be just as aggravated for different reasons.

ratty Wrote: -------------------------------------------------------> > Have they the power to fine? Is a bye law passed > stating that we must recycle? Short answer is yes, they can require that you recycle. However, they can't fine you if you don't have any recycling to put out, or if you recycle it elsewhere. The longer answer is that the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended by the London Local Authorities Act 2007) gives local authorities the power to specify how people separate their waste, e.g. which bin it should be placed in as well as which days it will be collected. It also provides for fixed penalty charges if people breach certain provisions of the Act. One of the sections you can be fined for breaching is section 46 (thrillingly entitled "Receptacles for Household Waste"). Section 46 allows Southwark to require us to use separate containers for recyclable waste, subject to certain conditions such as the number of containers and requirements for separation of waste must be reasonable. If you breach this section, for example by mixing recyclable and non-recyclable waste, you could in theory be liable to a penalty charge. However, if you don't have any recycling to put out, or recycle elsewhere, the penalty charge certainly couldn't apply. There has been huge amount of discussion about how Councils should use these powers. Councils say the threat of fines are essential to get through to those people who do no recyling at all. However, there are very limited guidelines as to how these powers should be applied, and a wide variation in practice between councils. See the various news stories about on the spot littering for a similar discussion. I have no connection to Southwark Council by the way, but take a keen personal and professional interest in civil liberties, if I can put it like that. This is a good example of the type of regulation that simply didn't exist 10 years ago, where there is potential for summary conviction, no requirement for a common sense application and only limited grounds for appeal.

The crows wake me up, running about on the flat roof above our bedroom every morning. You don't know fear until you open the back bathroom door and there, two feet from your face, is a crow - squawking on the railing. I say you don't know fear but s/he looked pretty frightened as well as s/he flew away trailing a trail of crow poo. This at 6 am, which was nice.

What *Bob* said. One other option to think about is stepped commission. So 1% if the agent sells at asking price, 1.25% if they sell at asking +15k and so on. We did this recently on our sale and it turned out pretty well. You need to work out your sums to check that the deal is enough to incentivise the agent and that you as seller don't pay over the odds if the agent produces a really good buyer, but also that it doesn't mean that the agent prices your property entirely outside the range of people who are most likely to follow through to exchange and completion. We didn't accept the highest offer made for that very reason. As a (recent) buyer in the ED area, I would certainly consider selling with Roy Brooks, who seemed significantly more straighforward to deal with than some other agents.

Agreed on the breadmaker option. We have a mid-range Panasonic which does the job v.well - there can be a bit of trial and error involved for anything other than a standard white loaf, but ours gets used regularly to make bagel dough and loaves of brioche.

I think one needs to draw a distinction between the leadership of the Council and the day to day services the Council offers. I'm sure Southwark have their moments, but having recently moved home, I found them to be surprisingly good. When they said they were going to deliver recycling boxes and a wheelie bin, they turned up. When we had a problem with our next door neigbour's tree growing down and blocking the pavement (and next door neighbour declined to do anything about it) I phoned up for some advice - they came the very next day and cut the tree back on the pavement side so people can use the footpath again. No connection to the Council by the way. The Berkeley Homes development at Tower Bridge being discussed on another forum is quite a different story and I have some sympathy for any council which tries to oppose a development in similar circumstances to that one. Developers have significant funds to throw at legal action and Berkeley have made very clear they are going to fight this one tooth and nail, including starting work on their own part of the site in circumstances where it's far from clear that they have permission to do that. If the Standards Board report earlier this year is anything to go by other local councils have their own share of problems - some allegedly far worse than those mentioned in the Mirror.

macroban Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > In Boston the rule is that you can't smoke while > standing still, so pavement smokers from pubs have > to walk round the block while fagging it. > > I had a look at www.cityofboston.gov to find the > wording of the City Ordinance to see the possible > effect if similar legislation was applied to East > Dulwich. > > I couldn't find anything. > > Is this for real or an urban myth? Can't speak for Boston, but there are a few places in Southern California which have "outdoor smoking bans" including Burbank and Santa Monica. The ordinance says something like you must be at least at least [20] feet away from any "path of travel, door or place where people congregate" and if you are asked to put your cigarette out by someone within [20] feet you must either do so or move on - hence the only real solution if you're in a built up area is to keep moving and stay off the main streets.

"Upper East Side" - brilliant, must remember that...and yup, we're pretty happy on the ED / Forest Hill border. Discovered Dulwich / Sydenham Hill Wood last weekend almost by accident and had a very pleasant ramble around. Sorry if this is OT but I couldn't work out if it follows an old railway or tram line, or just the line of a stream? I'm guessing railway from the large tunnel at the Sydenham end. Woods

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > As Serendipity said, a lot of places were > overvalued, and some sellers/agents/developers > have really been taking the p!ss with their asking > prices. Couldn't agree more. We went to see DKH towards the end of the build, really liked it, but when we started to discuss prices with the agent the following week, we were told they'd gone up by between 30k and 80k (depending on the size of the flat). No real explanation given even when we pressed the agent with prices achieved on other similar sites in and around SE London. We formed a view that the developers had a totally unrealistic expectation of what they could achieve on that site, and started looking elsewhere (successfully - though at the other end of Lordship Lane). Interesting to see the DKH prices appear to have come down to pretty much the original level now.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a thought, you're not up the top of Lordship > Lane towards Sydenham Hill and Hornimans are you. > There's a real reception problem there! What he said: Orange (and T-mobile) reception can be very patchy in the streets around the Horniman. I have no problem getting an Orange signal in our back garden, but often can't out the front of our house (even though it's far less exposed). I don't think it's a problem limited to Orange tho', but a general problem in this bit of ED.

It is possible (and increasingly normal) for local councils to impose requirements for security on licenced premises - something like "licence application granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Provision of an SIA registered doorman at weekends between 8pm and 2am..." Don't know the specifics here.

If you can get a collar onto him, I've had success before in tracing an owner of an apparently homeless cat by attaching a little capsule with a note on asking any owner to call? Turned out kitty wasn't so enamoured of the recent addition to the household - a 6 month old baby. I think the owners eventually decided to rehome her, given her obvious unhappiness.