Spartacus

Brilliant An hour ago my bank contacted me to say that there has been an attempt to withdraw money from my account on a new device. On their instructions I transferred to a new account (I'm overdrawn so that's going to be interesting) Half an hour later HMRC called as I owe them unpaid taxes, I gave them my new account details to do a direct debit from. Curious to see if robbing scammer one to pay scammer two will work .. for information I didn't really fall for it and no actual details were given out.

Correct dkhb, but removing the cars and not providing alternatives is what the council are proposing It's got to be joined up thinking, not just doing it on a wing and a prayer without massive investment in public transport.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > thanks S. and DF check out the crime map for Rye > lane street crime has not gone up. But I still > want the buses back. Hi Alice The crime map works on "reported" crime, from conversations I've had with residents who live above and around Rye Lane crime has increased but it isn't being reported which is why on paper the numbers aren't going up. My suggestion is that a conversation needs to be had with businesses and residents to ascertain the situation and despite the council saying they held a consultation before closing the lane, no one I have spoken with was involved and businesses were "told" Rye Lane was closing (hardly a consultation) I agree the buses need to return as its killing the Lane and disabled and elderly can't access the shops.

The twitter account for peckham sefifteen often has a good insight to the rye Lane issues And

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Good public transport is key to reducing car > use...absolutely agree. Good and safe from picking up covid or other transportable respiratory viral infections. Which means more of it running with everyone respecting each other and wearing masks However this doesn't mean penalising cars to make it run faster as "this service has been held to regulate service" will occur. It needs more buses, longer (more carriages), quicker and more frequent tube trains, maybe trams and more trains to various places. TFL are stymied by the issue with resistance to driverless trains / tubes as they can improve service frequency but require better infrastructure and the unions arguing it's not safe. The German Frankfurt tram system tested automatic obstacle detection and breaking systems plus dlr trains operate driverless which proves it can work but to retrofit to other tfl rolling stock (plus potentially new tram systems) requires investment which isn't available at the moment and no bashing of car users will produce that investment. So it appears stalemate for the moment, people need to get around, there's a general agreement that where practical car use should be less but the public transport system isn't going to be able to pick up a model shift in its present form and cycling / walking is only practical for short trips for the fit, non disabled and is generally elderly unfriendly plus as soon as you get a large item (or lots of shopping) to carry it's unsafe or difficult to cycle and walk. The current solution of bash / tax the driver will cause resentment so the real response should be massive investment in better, more frequent and possibly running at a loss / empty at times to more destinations public transport before people will substitute it for some (but not all) car journeys. The council are building resentment by what a lot of people see as waging war on motorists without also tackling the lack of practical safe alternatives (and not just the cheap option of saying cycling and walking which is frankly not enough)

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rye Lane has been car free in the main for years.. > > > it's now Bus Free. > > Foxy.. But as a result it's become an anti social behaviour hot-spot as there's no passing observers 😱

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They've been digging the tunnel from Stranraer to > Northern Ireland. > > Be nice to them as they've been underground for > months I suspect it's more likely they've been digging the poisson d'avril tunnel

Richard Lemming tweeted that in the "gated" (my word not his) area of Dulwich from next Tuesday residents who live in the area who are blue badge holders can apply for exceptions to the camera enforcement https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1377671423926370307?s=19 The posts that responded to it make interesting reading 😱

You may think this is a joke But if the glorious leader sees it,it will become council policy

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Selling Xmas trees in laybys November and December Is that after a busy strawberry selling season ?

Could this be a taste of the results ? https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1376891237324754951?s=19 Whilst inside the LTN, you can claim walking and cycling has gone up (against which baseline is a question to ask) it doesn't talk about the surrounding streets where traffic has gone up.

Whilst we all know that during March and April , as councils find creative ways to spend their remaining road repair funds, roadworks appear on virtually every street corner. What I can't work out is where they get all the road workers to do the various schemes during this intense blitz on our streets ? Do the majority of them go into hibernation for the months between ? Are they seasonal workers or are they busy doing "I'm just in your area doing road works and I've got some tarmac going spare if you want your drive done cheap" cold calls? This is NOT a serious thread so be creative and invent what you think they do for the rest of the year ?

Ex I didn't say it was happening, what I am simply stating is that any count / monitoring has to be validated, open and not subject to abuse. The council themselves state in their brochure on the ed ltn assessment that they will be counting cyclists and with enough warning the number of people cycling on count days could skew the results. We've seen the defensive position of the pro lobby over this , including , but not limited to , calling for boycotting of shops that disagree with them so it appears nothing is off the table. But your history on here suggests that you have an agenda and when it's questioned you accuse that poster of wearing a tin foil helmet in case cyclists are aliens (and yes that is tongue in cheek before you say I never said that) 😱 The simple other truth is we all saw how the council managed the data to implement the CPZ around the station so all that I'm asking for here is fair, validated and unmanipulated data. Otherwise if it's anything other there will be a public outcry

True , as I said it is one of the posts that are being discussed and as such can't confirm or dismiss how true it is, but equally I can't off hand (like some) say it's an urban myth It does however, raise the question of how to validate the cyclist count when the council monitors the ltn roads. If they use just strips then they can be tricked by riding back and forth If visual counting, then this should be done on random days and times to ensure that false positives can't be drawn if the pro lobby know in advance and flood the area with out of area mates. It has to be done in such a way that the true usage figure is captured and not false peaks or troughs that could skew the data.

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > There were reports on Twitter of groups of > cyclists repeatedly cycling over the monitor > strips (they were doubling back on themselves > several times) > > This urban myth is popular amongst cab drivers > too, not a surprise that the various One... groups > have picked up on it. This is one of the tweets that I think is being discussed about cyclists trying to "adjust" the count. I can't vouch if it's true or not, but equally I can't dismissing as myth

I read it that jazzer said 2022 not this year.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who objected? Trams would be great. See Dan b's post above to understand the short sighted objections. I believe Eileen and the RLSAG (now peckham vision) were the chief local objectors to what would have been a great scheme for the area.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who objected? Trams would be great. See Dan b's post above to understand the short sighted objections. I believe Eileen and the RLSAG (now peckham vision) were the chief local objectors to what would have been a great scheme for the area.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who objected? Trams would be great. I agree , and I did at the time but ho hum others didn't Maybe try contacting the cross river partnership ( https://crossriverpartnership.org/ ) to find out more about what happened and why it was shelved.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who objected? Trams would be great. I agree , and I did at the time but ho hum others didn't Maybe try contacting the cross river partnership ( https://crossriverpartnership.org/ ) to find out more about what happened and why it was shelved.

It's a real shame that the cross river partnership failed in their bid to bring trams back to Peckham town centre and up to north of the river via Holborn ten plus years ago. My impression at the time was that local vocals both at this end of the route (mainly objecting to the depot being in the town centre) and at various points along the route caused it to lose support. Cross river were considering extending it to meet up with the Croydon tram if it was implemented How short sighted were people in objecting to it as it would have been a clean green transport method helping to reduce our reliance on cars.

It's a real shame that the cross river partnership failed in their bid to bring trams back to Peckham town centre and up to north of the river via Holborn ten plus years ago. My impression at the time was that local vocals both at this end of the route (mainly objecting to the depot being in the town centre) and at various points along the route caused it to lose support. Cross river were considering extending it to meet up with the Croydon tram if it was implemented How short sighted were people in objecting to it as it would have been a clean green transport method helping to reduce our reliance on cars.

Do they give a breakdown of what is being done for the cost and why it is required ? That's your starting point to open discussions as you need to understand what and why before you can challenge the cost

It gets better The EU are going to discuss stopping the plants producing the AstraZeneca vaccine from exporting it to countries like the UK. It really smacks of panic over there at the moment and could result in a situation of It's your ball as you paid for it, it's got a puncture..... oh sorry we didn't pump it up so it's okay to use now, but we don't agree with you using it so we're taking it away from you .... You couldn't make it up if you tried 😱 So glad our vaccination program is at 50% not 10%

J.a. your post has left me craving a greasy spoon full English now.....