rendelharris

Ah shame. Maybe this site would help: https://www.bookaclassic.co.uk/ Failing that, at a mate's wedding in Wandsworth that was on a v.tight budget, to surprise him and his wife someone brought along a chauffer's hat and we found an amenable taxi driver who let us temporarily put white ribbons on the car and had them driven away in that. Cabbie was offered ?50 on top of fare (which I think was only about ?8 or something)- he refused even to take the fare!

This website looks quite old but if the company's still running would seem to fit the bill: http://www.figarohire.com/HirePrices.php

?When the spirits are low, when the day appears dark, when work becomes monotonous, when hope hardly seems worth having, just mount a bicycle and go out for a spin down the road, without thought on anything but the ride you are taking.? ― Arthur Conan Doyle Lots of segregated cycling routes these days...

Circle of life mate, quick death compared to animals farmed for our grub!

Ta :))

I don't know how people get their funky smileys on here so you'll have to settle for the old fashioned manual sort :-)

Blimey RPC, top shoehorning!

"Just a fight" at a school I briefly taught at resulted in one boy hitting his head on a wall after being punched, ending up in a long coma with permanent cognitive damage, and with his assailant going into youth custody. So my advice would be, if you don't feel qualified to break it up yourself (and in most cases, especially nowadays, it's probably inadvisable), do call the police, you might stop several lives being ruined. Pre-arranged fights outside school aren't the same as schoolyard larks and scraps, they're a serious business and need to be taken seriously by the public, the police and, if needs be, the courts. If nothing else, if kids don't learn this is a serious business now, they'll carry this behaviour into adulthood, only with higher stakes and heavier weapons. Sorry, pompous I know but I do feel quite strongly it shouldn't be seen as "just kids" - I've seen firsthand how this stuff can quickly escalate into very serious shit indeed.

adonirum Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Unusual use of the adjective "prurient", RH. :-) Prurient, having an immoderate or unwholesome interest, especially in sexual matters. I'm on the left of that especially!

All the more reason to drink real ale!

bodsier Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What would the consequences be for under 18s > fighting? Would they get a criminal record? They would likely, at worst, for fighting without knives, get a youth rehabilitation order, which is regarded as "spent" six months after the end of the order. And unless anyone was seriously hurt they're most likely to get a youth caution, which is "spent" as soon as issued.

I agree with some of your points, but don't forget that electric cars generally produce the same CO2 emissions in total (including power generation, manufacturing pollution etc) as the tailpipe emissions of a petrol car running at 51mpg. But that disregards the CO2 cost of producing gasoline, transporting it by ship, and then transporting it by tanker to the petrol stations, which significantly increases the overall CO2 footprint of a conventional petrol car. It would be far clearer if CO2 figures had to reflect the overall CO2 cost of every type of car, but the motor manufacturers won't wear that. It does seem unfair that low-level users like Captain Marvel are penalised for having such low usage, but the only way round that would be to have mileage monitors in all cars, linked to GPS, that would log all car use. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with that (be a great way to stop speeding too) but I'm sure the public outcry at the thought of Big Brother knowing exactly how, where and when cars were used would be enormous. Don't forget, also, that the chief aim of the ULEZ is to reduce Nox emissions, which are the main public health concern in London at present, and for electric cars the tailpipe emmissions in that respect are zero. It's all very complex and there will be a considerable amount of pain for some people, but I do believe that at some point in our lifetimes we'll look back and see the concept of using highly polluting internal combustion engines on our streets as being as ludicrous as the amount of pollution London had in the days of the lethal smogs before the Clean Air Acts. One last point - if Captain Marvel's right and one will have to pay the ULEZ charge every time one re-enters the zone (can't find any clear information online) then that's unfair, it should be like the current congestion charge zone in that one pays for a day's use.

Yes things can go wrong. They can go wrong with cars too. But looking at the live bus app right now, there are six buses that will get you to Denmark Hill or Peckham Rye arriving at Dulwich Library in the next twelve minutes. That's hardly poorly served, is it? Maybe I'm just very lucky, I go up to St.P about seven or eight times a year to meet friends from Paris as they pass through the Eurostar. I think in the last four years I've had one train cancelled - in which instance I just hopped the next train to Victoria, got the tube across and was still there in good time. I'm no cheerleader for the train and bus companies, they're awful sometimes. But I do think this whole poor East Dulwich is so badly served (and so by association we really must use cars) thing is way overplayed. We have three major stations (four if you count Forest Hill), serving multiple central London stations, within easy reach, plus the Overground, plus a plethora of bus routes, plus it's now possible to cycle virtually the whole way into the centre of town on off-road cycle paths. We're really quite well off.

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If my car is 14 years old in 2021 does that mean > it has to be replaced in 2022 when it reaches 15 > years? No because it would have been built after 2006 and so be Euro 4 compliant (assuming it's petrol-driven).

flocker spotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > yes/ no- it however is not age specifc but EURO3 > or 6 (petrol vs derv)is the trigger. Seeing as how you love to loftily tell others they're wrong - you're wrong. Petrol cars have to meet Euro 4 to avoid the ULEZ charge, not Euro 3.

mikeb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mine too. Well that?s annoying. And expensive. As > above, does anyone know any examples of compliant > MPVs? Any petrol vehicle, including MPVs and 4x4s, built since 2006 will be Euro 4 compliant and so not charged; any diesel built since 2015 will be Euro 6 compliant and so exempt.

Have you really nothing better to do, FS? That's very sad. ETA Good, you've withdrawn your post pompously telling others to stop. Maybe even you have realised how sad it is.

Get the live bus app, then you'll be able to make sure you arrive at the stop in time for the bus. Give yourself a ten minute buffer for emergencies (it doesn't take half an hour from DL to DH even at the height of the rush hour) and you'll still be in St.P in less than an hour.

Bus Dulwich library to Denmark Hill takes twenty minutes tops with a choice of several buses, direct train from Denmark Hill to St.Pancras twenty-one minutes.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It took me over an hour to St Pancras the other > day. If you've done it in 30 minutes odd, then > you've been exceptionally lucky I'd say. It always takes me that long, there's a direct train from Peckham Rye at 04 and 34, it takes 24 minutes.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the WebCAT tool. Pretty much an hour > minimum to get into central London from ED on > public transport. With kids, longer. Yesterday I went to St.Pancras International to meet a mate from Paris, it took me 10 mins to walk to the station and 25mins on the train, how is that a minimum of an hour? The only way it'd take me more than an hour to get to central London is if I walked it, and even then I'd have to dawdle.

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- 2kms doesn't seem > much but there are plenty of places within the M25 > where you need a car to cover a 2 or 3 km distance > to the closest train station, without having a > public transport alternative. Yes, it sucks having > to buy a car just for such a small journey, but > what's the alternative? A brisk walk? A short bicycle ride? How did our grandparents manage when almost nobody had a car? This is the level we've reached, when people can't see an alternative to having a car for a 2KM journey. No wonder we're all getting fatter!

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > PS rendel, what's with you and flocker? You and I > have had our disagreements but I think we have > always managed to keep it civilised. Indeed, because you've always had a point to make and argued it coherently and cogently and I respect that even if we disagree. A quick glance at FS's posting history demonstrates that s/he is only interested in putting others down and trying to portray her/himself as some sort of intellectual using dem big ol'words like "abstract conceptualization". Shame they can't punctuate, rather spoils the impression. Back to cars, I'm not against people having them and using them sensibly, but they are massively and unnecessarily overused - we've all seen the ludicrous statistics about car use in London, with a third of journeys being less than 2,000 metres! Re Sainsburys etc, why don't more people use home delivery? I'd far sooner be out in the back garden playing with a toddler in this weather, waiting for someone else to bring my shopping, than lugging said toddler round the supermarket.

QED.

Give it up FS, your lofty comments contribute nothing and are merely intended to show how superior you are. They don't work and just make you look rather silly. I haven't seen so much pointless pretension since supervising first-year B.A.students.