alex_b

UVArchitects Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Maybe quite a few people in a number of > departments in the borough need a kick up the > arse. The barriers that have been put up are > inadequate as it is likely to fall into the road. > It should be scaffolded immediately or half of the > road closed off. I went past it earlier in the week and it looks like it could collapse at any moment. The way it's leaning makes it look like a significant amount of debris would fall forward into the street. A few plastic barriers and a notice on the window are not going to prevent serious tops parts of the upper windows come down. I agree it needs scaffolding and proper (wooden) hoardings erected. In the meantime they should at least suspend the parking directly outside the property.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This keeps on happening here and elsewhere where > these Bell shaped Low bollards are being used. IE > Ady's Rd. > > Drivers cannot see them. In this case the car > appears to of mounted the pavement In order to hit them you have to be cutting the kerb quite significantly. For this reason I have very little sympathy, especially in Adys Rd where there are 3 primary schools within 250m of that junction. herne hilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i started reading this and thought the same as > someone previously, how lovely everyone was being, > but then everyone went straight to pre judging the > poor driver. I hope she is ok, as it must have > been quite frightening. If you can't make a left hand turn without cutting across the pavement you should: a) wait until the junction is clear b) get a vehicle with proper visibility c) stop driving. The fact that the driver didn't see a bollard shows they didn't see the curb either. Would you have as much sympathy if they hadn't seen a small child? I'm a driver too, but I recognise that driving a couple of tons of metal around crowded streets is a privilege not a right.

We pay ?10 an hour, but we have two weeknights of babysitting included already.

Give Rear Facing Toddlers a ring (http://www.rearfacingtoddlers.com/, 0775 2253499). Margaret is super knowledgeable and has a number of kids herself so she's faced the multiple seat conundrum. She came out to us with a bunch of different seats to try in our car (and with our son). I'm sure she'd be able to work out a combination that will fit in your BMW.

rollflick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Unfortunately while the proposals > were also rejected by a resounding 2/3 of people > who responded, they were quietly rubber stamped > days before the council shut down for the May > elections. Has this been published somewhere? I thought that the consultation hadn't been responded to formally and no decision had been made?

It happens by us all the time. The driver cuts the corner and the raised chassis of the SUV lets the wheel drive straight up the bell bollard. Usually it gets jammed in the wheel arch so I guess the driver was going pretty quickly to get so far along. Prosecutions for driving without due care and attention would be in order, if you can't spot a bollard you wouldn't spot a child waiting to cross the road either.

Both our neighbours sold with Gareth James last year. The got above asking price and very rapid offers (within a week I think). Apparently they were negotiable on fees too. We sold our last place through KFH in Crystal Palace and bought through KFH ED, both we?re fine if unspectacular.

We went to Daniel Tweedie (http://www.danieltweedie.com/) at Parkside in Wimbledon (although he also sees children elsewhere). Absolutely brilliant doctor and well worth seeing him.

We just take ours with us. We have a massive padded/armoured bag (Clek Weelee) it fits in and check it in with our luggage. Pretty much every airline (even easyjet and ryanair) lets you check a car seat and pushchair for free. We do have a mifold booster as well, but this is really only for short taxi journeys; it's better than nothing but it's nowhere near as good as a proper seat/high sided booster. For a holiday where we have a hire car we're happier to have our usual car seat.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Worth checking on the DVLA website for VED and > MOT, if it has neither you can get it towed - > sounds like a dumper. Unfortunately there are a lot of "dumped" vehicles that are still taxed and MoT'd. I presume they're very occasionally used vehicles that take advantage of the free parking in East Dulwich to avoid parking pressure/charges elsewhere. We've had a couple of panel vans and campers dumped/stored near us, but still taxed and MoT'd. When the council finally put notices on them they we're simply moved to an adjacent street and left there instead. I suspect some of the campers are being lived in, but it's hard to monitor.

We used buggypitstop.co.uk. The service was good but it?s ?15 each way for collection/delivery.

The middle box is your main incoming supply and master circuit breaker, then you have your consumer unit and then you appear to have a mess of junctions to connect everything up. My guess is that whomever added the new consumer unit couldn?t be bothered to replace the whole setup and created that mess instead. I wouldn?t have thought it was dangerous but it?s hardly the most professional installation in the world.

A similar issue on the Maxted, Nutbrook, Adys, CPR rat run. If there?s a scheme to implement that would be a huge help.

MarkT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Average speed cameras are good in principle but > how would it work on Barry Road with its multiple > crossings? This must be considered in relation to > the planned CPZ in adjoining streets. Even if only a minority of cars were travelling the full length of the road it would slow the overall speed of traffic including for those joining/leaving on the crossing roads. Place a third camera towards the middle and you probably catch most people. There is also a significant deterrent effect from having visible cameras even if they don't catch anyone/everyone.

DulwichSal Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I have written twice to Helen Hayes... no reply as > yet She probably hasn?t received them yet ;)

I?m also unconvinced that raised tables will make things much safer. In my experience they massively increase road noise (especially from large vehicles) and simply lead to hard acceleration and sudden breaking between the obstacles. Unfortunately this seems to be Southwark?s only approach to resolving traffic issues.

jamesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The council is in the process of installing 50 > further charging points across the borough. If you > have a location that you would like to suggest > then do let me know. Are these all going to be at the very high per minute rates as the existing ones? It seems fairly pointless if recharging an electric vehicle is as/more expensive per mile than filling a petrol car.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > By 6 you need a high backed booster. This depends on the height and weight of the child, not their age. Usually the limit for a harness is 25kg although some are lower. Car seats can be used in the front seat (check your vehicle manual for information on airbags), but it is safer for the child to be in the rear. The middle seat is safest if you have a three point belt, otherwise chose the left hand side so they're getting out on the pavement side. In any seat a child under 135cm must be in a carseat/booster. Presuming you are going with a high backed booster, it's good to get one that secures to the main seat with ISOFIX, that way you don't need to remember to strap it in when your child isn't in the car. We've used http://www.rearfacingtoddlers.com/ before, but I don't think they do high back boosters. It's worth giving her a call though for some professional advice.

You can lock down an iPhone to exclude apps and use of the internet. We have an old iPhone that's locked down to some child appropriate games and TV apps. On iOS12 these restrictions have moved under "Screen Time" in settings, on iOS11 I think they were under "Settings" -> "General" -> "Restrictions". I'd suggest setting up a new apple ID for your child, by creating a child ID this will link to your main apple ID. You'll then have to approve app installs via your phone which provides better control.

Surely being in a list of "cool" places in a Daily Mail article is the definition of uncool?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > someone told me that the EU had a hand in the > privatisation of Royal Mail- something about EU > competition rules and the state cannot subsidise > the 'industry' Except most of Europe has state owned postal and rail services. The Lexit arguments about state aid are so obviously untrue it is pathetic.

nunhead_man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > concerning the post that says > > "Paul Lupton Wrote: The sooner vehicles can use > the bridge again the better - Bellenden is overrun > with traffic " > > Say after me 100 times > > "Roads create traffic" > > e.g > https://bettertransport.org.uk/roads-nowhere/induc > ed-traffic But there is evidence that the closure shifted traffic to less suitable roads. If a closure of Bellenden (and associated side roads) was on the cards I might agree with you. But the choice was between closing the bridge with no mitigation for other roads or reopening the bridge - in that case the choice for residents in and around Bellenden was obvious.

I have a Fellowes 11C and it has been pretty reliable over the last few years. It'll take 10 pages at a time and go for a decent length of time before getting hot.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Captain Marvel Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > A crossing there, ensuring the safety of > imaginary > > pedestrians will make it unimaginably worse. > > Put off by using that junction currently thanks to > the currently dangerous junction which isn't > suitable for crossing. I run there quite regularly and I see lots of other people trying to cross.

First I would post on James (the new councillor's) thread to see if he can nudge them to do their job. Also I would phone first thing tomorrow morning, ask to speak to a manager and say that you're about to call your insurers who will pursue the council for their costs. Having some potential cost liability might focus their mind. If it doesn't then call your insurers and let them fight with the council.