Penguin68

But the majority of Southwark residents don't live in leafy suburbs with gardens - those who do should be paying even more for that privilege than they already do through their community charge. Maybe it will encourage them to pave over their gardens and have properly organised lives, without unnecessary greenery blighting the urban landscape. And it will get rid of those nasty flying insects, reduce the hayfever scourge, improving air quality - who wants to smell mown grass or lawn clippings? And we will certainly be paving any front gardens, so we can park our cars and vans. It's all to the good. Help stamp out nature by making it too expensive for the ordinary Joe. Who won't be able to get easily to the parks now if they are not prepared to walk. So that will keep the parks free of the elderly and those with young children. It's just a win win win for everyone!

the poorer you are the less likely you are to drive. A progressive society makes it easier for poor people to have good stuff, a regressive society makes it more difficult and fuels resentment between haves and have nots. And if cars aren't 'good stuff' - how come it's the wealthy with them and not the poor (except of course that many 'poor' people do have access to cars and vans, some for their work)? Actually the younger (adult) you are the less likely you are to drive, particularly in London. The young find it easier to get about (they are fitter) and car insurance for the young can be prohibitive. For many young people owning a car is an expense to far. As long as they have a friend with a car who can drive them when necessary! When they start families is when they start to become car owners (often).

Badly

...but most petrol cars will be unaffected. The CPZ is required to improve our air quality Catalytic converters are what 'clean' petrol exhaust of e.g. unburned hydrocarbons. The main 'pollutant' from petrol engines is CO2 - which is vital for the growth of plants and is not the cause of any 'air quality' issues. And a CPZ will 'keep out' electric and hydrogen powered vehicles as much as any other - is anyone suggesting that these (as vehicles) are polluters or impact air quality? - and we have no power stations locally which might be air pollutants as they generate electricity to power electric vehicles. The only reason for this is revenue generation (and penalising car owners) - IT WILL HAVE NO AIR QUALITY IMPACT in SE22. Anyone who is actually claiming (rather than repeating other's claims in good faith) a CPZ as an effective and measurable contributor to air quality (outwith the ULEZ impact) in SE22 is, well, a liar. It is being done for revenue and social/ political reasons.

Thank you

Does anyone know whether these charges actually have been introduced yet?

This thread's title offers more than it delivers!

They will be surveying for leaks, using I imagine metal detectors to identify exactly where pipes run into properties, and those long listening devices to detect water movement at pipe junctions. The markings may be to identify where pipes are running.

My main concern is that The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan will be involved. And in concert with Chris Grayling? - The mind boggles!

This is electioneering - TfL has real money problems at the moment and if Labour do get nationally in they will have far bigger nationalisation plans than train services for London only. If you want to vote for Sadiq as Mayor fine, but don't do it because of this bit of 'pie-in-the-sky'. And as has been pointed out the actual logistic problems (let alone the full costs) of doing this are huge.

Even where they have pedlars' licences the rules of caveat emptor apply. The goods they sell may well not be value for money, and the way they sell them may be aggressive and threatening. And the narrative they tell (i.e. being ex-offenders) may be a lie or distortion - as is the implication that the profits they make go anyway towards a 'good' cause. A Pedlar's licence is no different from any other - a driving licence after all guarantees only a minimal amount of capability - there are still bad drivers, who break the law, licenced or not.

Dog bites are filthy things - they should always be treated at an A&E where antibiotics are available - dogs mouths are vectors for a range of nasties (and if you're bitten through clothing that will push further unpleasantness into the blood stream). Puppies will nip, on occasion, and they can be forgiven for that, but adult dogs that bite, unless themselves attacked, should be considered for euthanasia. There is no excuse for having a biting dog in public (guard dogs and farm dogs may be a different case).

https://www.gla.gov.uk/

These boys are often run by a gangmaster who sends groups of them into a neighbourhood - you will find him with a van re-stocking them if necessary. They may well be ex-offenders, but they are no part of any formal recognised ex-offender programme - what they 'earn' goes straight to the gangmaster, from which they will be paid a pittance. Don't buy from them, (there are perfectly good and legal ex-offenders charities (Googling will bring up a list) if you want to support ex-offenders) and if they seem threatening, call the police.

It's wide enough for all other traffic, including lorries, to 'squeeze' through. But my point is, the road isn't closed. Underhill has always been a 'bit of a squeeze' - but this small space coned off is occupying no more room than a parked car or van, in a place where vans or cars can legally park! And there is no work going on - the area blocked off looks to have been fully repaired and the road restored. Of course Thames Water should remove their blockage - but surely TFL could have required this of them. Or is TFL looking for an excuse to close down the Underhill bit of the P13 route south of Barry? In which case all the whining about - 'why don't you take the bus?' by the Southwark anti-car mavens looks a little weak. The buses on Underhill do have to negotiate parked cars, of course, but this blockage is no more than a parked car.

BUT UNDERHILL ROAD IS NOT CLOSED! Sorry to shout, but I've been driving up and down the full length of Underhill for the last 3 days - there is a small area which is coned off (less than half the road width, about a car's length)- the road way has been repaired and there is no work going on at all. Neither are there any signs showing the road to be closed or any diversion signs. Lorries etc. are happily driving up and down - it is only the P13 which is diverting, and there has been no need for that, as I said, for at least 3 days. Even when there was work going on, it didn't close the road. This is different from the closure last week, where the road was marked as closed and there were diversions in place. TFL is being entirely ridiculous.

indeed it was quite a shock to see that the brick is not, in fact, brick. Or was I being incredibly naive! This has been widely discussed in an earlier thread, brick or stone cladding on buildings is very common - much of Bayswater is stone clad - it doesn't represent any form of cheap or skimped building works, necessarily, but reflects a finish which is deemed to be appropriate. It can allow for levels of e.g. insulation far better than any apparent surface finish. Think of it as being a tiled finish - as indeed buildings in e.g. Kent often have tiled walls.

Many items of large furniture have been brought into rooms through windows - you can remove sash windows entirely - although you will need a good handyman and a crane or hoist to do this - in Amsterdam the very narrow houses actually have hoists on the roofs so that furniture can be brought in that way. Also good furniture removers are amazing at moving stuff - I can recall a (small) upright piano which we were touring with being taken up (and down) a metal spiral staircase - I watched it happen and still couldn't believe it.

About five minutes ago a "signed for", letter was put through my door. I have no idea who signed for it (obviously not me, nor anybody at this address), nor who put it through my door. Possibly delivered to a neighbour in your absence and then posted to you by them?

Not clear whether this charge is for food waste or just garden waste in bags? Collecting food waste is a core and statutory duty of the council - such collections are already factored in to the Community charge. I believe it is brown bin garden waste which is referred to, and the council will (I believe) charge separately for the garden waste bags now given free. Presumably if you pay their ransom they will give you a sticker for your bin, or some other identifier. They are starting in 2 weeks time, yet have made no provision or plan for any of this. Nor any real announcement (the information being posted does not come from any communication made direct to residents, but from their tedious and obscure documents). And I note it takes an ex councillor (and not any of the incumbents) to confirm the rumours.

The cherry blossom across ED at the moment is amazing - Whately St is transformed - and it's the best season for Magnolia I can remember - I suspect all down to that wonderful hot spell we had in February. Worth going out to catch it - the cherry blossom will be gone in a week. We could be in Japan (as I was this time last year). Friern and Upland good too, as are sections of Underhill.

Actually, when you consider the schemes are targeted on people with cars, with gardens, who live in the more suburban parts of the borough (where public transport is dire) - with parks, etc. etc. it's just good old fashioned class war - which is what you sign up for when and if you vote labour, particularly now with the changed regime at the top. And many will (and on these threads do) welcome exactly that. There are good economic reasons why class war is bad (and statistics show that currently there is more employment - and less wealth diversity - than in the past) but why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

There are cases to be made for differential charging for different services (although as I've sent no children to be state educated maybe I should have a discount - oh, it doesn't work like that?) - what I object to is to receive a very short letter from the council making claims about the levels of charge rise - which implies some sort of like for like comparison when (and if) they plan to increase the costs to me of the services I take from them over and above that level, because I could choose not to have garden waste removed (waste which they then compost for their own use!). That (if that's their intention) is (or would be) simply duplicitous. The trouble is that I have so little trust of Southwark that I am quite happy to believe that they will lie and obfuscate in this manner. It's what I have come to expect. I hope the rumour is wrong - (which is not to say that I wouldn't wish them to make a case and debate such a change - just that the implied manner of what they are doing would sicken me if the rumour is true). The fact that none of their elected lackeys is prepared to bell this particular cat (either through their own ignorance or policy) really says it all.

We don't have a brown bin but we do use the bags a few times a year. How will that be provided for? You either pay an annual fee to have garden waste collected, or it isn't collected. As it was explained to me by the bin man. How they keep a record of who has paid is moot, of course. Indeed the management of this will cost more than they gain, particularly as they will have to provide everyone with the larger kerb side caddies - the kitchen caddy doesn't hold enough. But this is still rumour and innuendo at this time, even if they are to start charging in April - as the householders know nothing official. (And wouldn't, if it isn't true, of course!)

I told them (as the notice by my front door said) that I did not buy on the door. One guy originally and then back with a second guy. I didn't open the door that time. Clearly threatening.