rendelharris

Two cases with contrasting opinions on this, one lost and one won: http://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/Missing-T-Bar-Minier-case/ http://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/Missing-T-Bar-Case-Win/ End of the day though, we all know a double yellow line means don't park there, don't we!

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A fair few of the newly-painted double yellows are > not finished because the bar at the end has not > been painted on. I phone the number on the A4 > sheet attached to lampposts and got a text > (requested) reply saying that the council is aware > and that they will be finished anon. In the > meantime, does it mean you can park on them > because they are not finished and not get fined? I doubt it - I remember seeing an appeal a few years back where a new drain grating had been installed which broke a yellow line and it hadn't been repainted and someone appealed a ticket; as I recall the basis of rejection was that whether a part was missing or not there was enough line there to show that there were restrictions. An appeal claiming a driver didn't think double yellows meant they couldn't park there because there wasn't a bar at the end would get short shrift, I'd imagine.

Been a while (too long!) so not sure about accommodation, sure Airbnb will offer many good things. One cool place not many visit is the Torre Argentina, it's a complex of temple ruins (including the spot Caesar was assassinated) but also a cat sanctuary where volunteers look after feral cats. It's one of those places that remind you that Rome has so much history the Romans hardly see it as such!

moondancer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There was an article on thursday 1st citing > Brixton Road as having breached the annual legal > limits by end January. Which is a disgrace, obviously. However, in previous years Brixton Road has breached this level as early as January 4th, so although there's a long way to go there is cause to think we may be going in the right direction.

And happy Six Nations day everybody! Love this time of year, one of the greatest tournaments in sports begins and you know that by the time it's over spring will be almost here!

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Lloyds on Northcross Street, I believe. > > > Sorry to be picky but it's North Cross Road :) Quite right, don't know where that brainfreeze came from!

Lloyds on Northcross Street, I believe.

Can anyone confirm this? Nothing on their FB page or Twitter feed and their website doesn't exist any more!

No, it was the police, don't know why though. Around for quite a while, good half hour.

hapeeone! Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thank you Siduhu very informative, but I should > have asked if anyone remembers when it was called > the Harp Club before it became the Venue it was an > Irish dance hall and I know many Nures From > Greenwich and the Miller hospitals would go there > .thanks There's a short history here but lots of people sharing their memories of the Harp in the comments section beneath: http://transpont.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/venue-pre-history.html

El Presidente Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > flocker spotter Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > So lets condense these postings : Don't give > them > > anything because they are loaded/drug fiends/ > > alcoholics/smokers/ users of an over priced > coffee > > shop but donate to cat charities instead. > > > > all heart all the time. > > Of course far better to show your 'heart' by > giving drug addicts the means to buy more drugs > and eventually kill themselves. > > As long as you can tell people what a 'good' > person you are, that's all that matters to people > like you. I'll always take someone who may be misguided but has a good heart over a pompous cynic with no heart at all. Just sayin', like.

lavender27 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why is it called "white stuff". , if it was > called"black stuff" there would be a uproar? Seriously? I mean really seriously? It's called white stuff as it began as an apres-ski wear firm, started by two British lads working in Val D'Isere calling themselves "Boys from the White Stuff." Pretty sure if someone wanted to set up a shop selling, say, Goth clothing and called it "Black Stuff" nobody would give, ahem, a stuff. Your post took me back to the '80s when the Sun used to peddle rubbish about black coffee being banned in County Hall!

Good points, fair enough! Though I would contend that anyone going straight on out of Turney who doesn't realise that they should go to the left of the large traffic-light-mounted island is perhaps not really suited to being on the road. Radical suggestion and sure there are many points against it, but why not make Calton Ave a dead end (with cycle/emergency access) at the point where it merges with Court Lane? This would make traffic in both directions use the Red Post/Village way crossroads, which is perhaps better able to cope with the traffic volumes. Most people coming out of Turney or turning right off Village Way to go on to Calton are probably using it as a shortcut to ED Grove, so they'd only really be being asked to go round different sides of the same (rough) square.

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NorfolkNchance Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > DulwichSal Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > This place is an accident waiting to happen. > > > > Accidents don't just happen, they're normally > > caused by bad driving, you can't blame a road > > layout for accidents.....drive carefully and > you > > wont crash, its quite simple really. > > Tosh. Forcing traffic headlong into each other > (Turney to Carlton and vice versa) is insane and > dangerous. Serious question - what's the difference to what pertained before? Didn't traffic from Turney Road always drive towards traffic coming out of Calton Ave?

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So the buses are diverted from quite a way before > Forest Hill. Thanks. Only the buses which turn right onto Dartmouth Road - if you hop on the 185 it's still going past Forest Hill station.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > poch Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Government's own analysis January 2018. > > > > 'The "no deal" scenario, which would see the UK > > revert to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, > > would reduce growth by 8% over that period. The > > softest Brexit option of continued > single-market > > access through membership of the European > Economic > > Area would, in the longer term, still lower > growth > > by 2%.' > > > > And in terms of all those trade deals, here are > > the projected numbers... > > > > 'The analysis assumes in all scenarios that a > > trade deal with the US will be concluded, and > that > > it would benefit GDP by about 0.2% in the long > > term. Trade deals with other non-EU countries > and > > blocs, such as China, India, Australia, the > Gulf > > countries, and the nations of Southeast Asia > would > > add, in total, a further 0.1% to 0.4% to GDP > over > > the long term.' > > > I don't think you're comparing apples with apples > there. 'Growth' being 8 percent lower doesn't mean > GDP will be 8 percent lower.... S/he's not comparing anything, that's the governments own leaked analysis! And "Growth" is measured directly by the rise or fall of GDP (not adjusted for inflation) so if GDP is -3% compared to the previous quarter then growth will be -3% too.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks for publicising another potential bike > crime hotspot rh.... Yes, I'm sure the villains of Bermondsey are reading the EDF and thinking gosh, a long dark stretch of deserted path, I'd never have thought of mugging anyone there. Try not to be a total %&$@& at all times, you know, give it a rest once a week or something.

jimbo1964 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One of my colleagues was also robbed for their > bike on the Q1 late one evening. He was ambushed > by a dozen or so youths who surrounded him on a > quiet stretch. He just handed the bike over to > them. Very frightening. If I get another bike I'm > not sure I'll use this route again.. Which is sad > as it's very safe compared to the Old Kent Road. Hope you can, I know it's hard to get back out after an accident let alone something as horrible as this. If I might suggest, a good and quite safe way which avoids the canal path is, from Elephant, to take Brandon Street and Portland Street down to Albany Road, do a quick left and right and take Wells Way through Burgess Park, join Southampton Way and come through to ED via Lyndhurst Way/Bellenden Road. There is an inherent problem with Quietways in that their quietness can facilitate this sort of thing - I know I stay off the stretch from South Bermondsey round the back of the Den when it's dark as it feels like an easy place to get trapped. Not ungrateful at all for the Quietways which are brilliant in the day, but there's not much point to steering cyclists out of the frying pan into the fire.

Really sorry to hear this and glad you're not physically injured. I noted on here a while ago that several times when riding that route after dark I've had people standing off the path shout things to me like "Mate you've got no lights on" (did) or "you've got a puncture" (didn't) which I assumed were attempts to get me to stop or slow to facilitate taking the bike. Take care everyone!

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Linked to the comments on parking - does anyone > know how I'd find out if a dropped kerb was > applied for properly and approved by the council > please? Email [email protected] (they're who you have to apply to for permission so they should know)

stringvest Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You do seem to get some cyclists that seem to want > to own the road and are pious yet they pay nothing > towards the routes that are being made for them, > the motorists do. God almighty, does this really have to be said again? I suppose so...roads (and cycle lanes) are paid for from general taxation and council tax. There is no "road tax" which motorists pay for the roads - like the NHS, the police, etc etc, we all pay for them whether we use them or not. Cyclists pay these taxes just like everyone else. Furthermore most cyclists also own cars or motorcycles and pay Vehicle Excise Duty too. You want to call them pious that's fine, that's your opinion, don't say they don't pay for the roads because it's simply not true.

The idea that hunting with dogs is illegal is a joke. You can trail hunt with dogs and oh whoops, if they go after a fox by accident (sic) no problem (even if you're quite clearly running with terriermen and other illegal accoutrements). Ban it properly or keep it legal, the current arrangements are, in P.J.O'Rourke's memorable phrase, "sticking a 'kick me' sign on the arse of the law."

Curious as I have mates near there I emailed Maroush to ask - "We currently have no plans for any new outlets in that area."

PollyG Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One of my concerns with the route being extended > up to, but not including, the north and south > circulars is that there are many schools (state > and private- not that debate please) along/near > the south circular and it seems likely that by > extending the ULEZ it will result in an increased > amount of traffic along these routes. It seems at > odds with wanting to improve air quality for > London`s children to then potentially push more > traffic past their schools. Anyone know if there > will be a corresponding fund for green screens/ > planting solutions to help detoxify the air past > the affected schools? The trouble is, London is so dense that anywhere you draw a line will have a lot of schools around it. Hopefully the benefits of cleaner air as people start to ditch their old diesels will outweigh any extra traffic on the south circular - if there is an increase, I'd guess that those wanting to avoid London already use the south circular and those wanting to go in will have to pay the charge or change vehicle. Does anyone know if the line will be on the south or north side of the road?

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway,question for Rendel. Why would you call > yourself an atheist when you could say agnostic? Well I suppose one could - I believe even Professor Dawkins has said he's an agnostic because he can't actually disprove the existence of a deity. Agnosticism just always feels a bit vanilla...I mean no, I can't disprove the existence of a deity, but then neither can I disprove that the universe exists within an enormous marzipan teapot but on balance I don't think it does.