Penguin68

Here in Underhill too. Quite threatening. Said they were selling to support ex offenders and would I want people to have to start burgling?

I was also told by a (brown bin) man from Veolia. Charge of ?60 or ?80 annually. It looks like the council is planning a number of 'surprise' (never mentioned in the community charge leaflet) charges. So the leaflet will be (in so far as it states % rises) a lie - as the actual rise for many people will be higher (but because you can choose not to have garden waste collected, I suppose treated as discretionary). That's why I started a thread on Tooley St and trust.

a 5k takes you 3 hours??? Presumably includes time to arrive, change, warm up, get to the start position and run through the start line, finish, warm down, change, perhaps meet up with fellow athletes...

Punishing car drivers - they know cyclists will ignore the light anyway. It's all part of Southwark's war against motorists.

They also advertise a 0.780Kg carton of cornflakes at ?2 - when the carton size is in fact 0.720KG (for ?2)

Thank you. Thames Water is clearly planning to entirely isolate Dulwich before the troops are sent in to clear the area.

This road has been blocked off to traffic since Thursday (possibly Wednesday). Which means the P13 doesn't seem to travel south of Barry up Underhill. Does anyone know why, and when the road may re-open?

There have been/ are a number of initiatives currently going on in ED (CPZ 'consultation'; changes to road topology being 'tested', etc.) Most of those are, and stay, 'top of the listings' in this forum. On the face of it this seems to be the exercise of democracy and consultative behaviour. However I have noted a great deal of scepticism (and yes, from me as well) about the level to which Tooley St. can be trusted to act fairly. So, a simple question - do you trust the elected and appointed officials in Tooley St.? Do you believe what they say about their motives; do you believe the evidence they offer to justify their behaviours? And if you don't believe them, do you have evidence to support this?

I think we all know how politicians treat the outcome of plebiscites, let alone self selecting 'research'. They will do what they want, arguing that they know best. Consulting the people, insulting the people - same difference to some people. A majority of the apparat want a CPZ - well if the people get the vote wrong, ignore the people.

Craig Wallace (or his office) has never responded to me (I've written twice), although the PO Chairman's office did for my first complaint (not just a form letter) and Helen Hayes has been very responsive. However I have to say that in the last few weeks my post is more clearly 'normal' (occasional glitches apart - they still haven't worked out how to rota for days off) and I am genuinely worried how they will cope when the proper holiday season comes round again.

That was perhaps the 'conclusion too many' although the earlier and initial power problems could have been inferred (presumably wrongly) as that.

To be fair to DF - this launch has had its teething problems (all from the forum):- Re: New restaurant on Lordship Lane - "Saucy" Posted by awesome3 20 December, 2018 14:25 Hi There Huge apologies for this! We had an issue with power over the weekend so when you came we weren't quite open and still testing everything and putting the finishing touches to the restaurant! We are opening officially from this afternoon and will absolutely be open on Christmas Eve so we would love to see you and the family and give you a great Christmas experience! Watch this space very shortly to check out the final opening menu! Thanks so much and we look forward to seeing you soon! Jules and The Saucy Team x Please email me personally if you want to chat about Christmas [email protected] And then Posted by awesome3 30 December, 2018 14:52 Hi There We have actually run into a power issue so we are having to temporarily close so we can upgrade and will reopen in January at some point hopefully. I have also received some really great feedback re pricing and types of things people want to see so I am tweaking the menu. Will put in up as soon as I have it ready. Thanks so much Jules And then Posted by alex_b January 13, 08:45AM The message on their website says: ?DUE TO SNAGGING AND FURTHER BUILDING WORKS, WE WILL BE REOPENING ON FEB 1ST?. I think I saw somewhere that they needed to redo a load of the electrical work. I?m looking forward to going when they reopen. And then Posted by julesheaton February 09, 02:06PM Hi Guys Quick update - The power issues and function room renovations (a huge job!) are very nearly complete and the building is looking great. Next job is to work on the terrace area and planters and we are waiting for our awning which is currently being produced. Re healthy options and the full menu. Saucy is about celebrating great sauces as part of a variety of different dishes from around the world and not just a burger restaurant like GBK/Byron etc. In fact we have a pretty substantial section of the menu dedicated to lighter dishes/salads, veggie options including vegan, and hearty bowls such as our signature Chilli. But if you fancy being a bit naughty and having our Cornish haddock and chips or a Saucy burger and some loaded chips we have that too! Targeted to open at the beginning of March so hope to see you all soon Cheers Jules So power has been identified as an issue - and there have been a number of false start 'openings'. Maybe DF jumped to a conclusion too many - but I don't think he can be blamed too much for that. I wish them well when they do 'hard' open and hope that they will be meeting local needs for many years.

Admin Is it possible to update the Local Info tab on this site - some information is no longer accurate, some links don't work. I have found it very useful in the past, but information is becoming time expired. For instance the local Councilor information no longer reflects ED's wards (i.e. Goose Green, Dulwich Hill etc.) nor its councilors. I do know that's a lot of extra work for someone (i.e. you!)

DF got it wrong - apparently. May well have been misinformed. I wonder what real pleasure can be got from trashing? And crowing. Aren't we (shouldn't we be?) better than that. Amended to say - cross post with above - hope your pain (DF) recedes and you can get back to a more normal life.

Given the choice most children prefer walking, cycling, scootering to school. In my experience, rather depends on the weather. Also - the assumption is being made that parents face the task of getting a child to school. But many face getting two or more children to different schools, often in different directions (from their house), one child at least probably needing to be accompanied, however travelling, and then, very possibly, additionally getting to work themselves (getting to a station etc.). Once those logistics are in place, the simplicity of 'walking your child to school' somewhat evaporates. For many children 'getting to school' if on their own (secondary school) can mean running the gauntlet of other children on foot or on buses - many years ago teachers (in a school my children went to) used to travel on some buses to try to protect their pupils from those of a rival school. As gangs and mugging proliferate, travel by car seems a safer option to some. And I can't blame them. My cosy 1950s schooldays of cycling, walking or busing to school in relative safety are long gone.

Obviously you do not need to activate a new contacless card at an ATM with your card. - this I do not understand as it would solve the problem. You should have to use your PIN before the contactless on a new card works. My wife has just received a new bank card where that is explicitly stated. Some cards also require you to authorise them on receipt using web or phone. It may be that some cards do not require this (PIN use before contactless) but I don't know of them. However, I'm sure somebody with the right equipment and knowledge can bypass card security.

you believe that there should be absolutely no measures to control car use in residential areas? - I didn't say that at all. The 20mph restriction, ULEZ, pressures to move towards electric, hybrid and hydrogen powered vehicles all contribute to either safety or air quality. However removing parking spaces and hence potentially increasing (albeit illegal) speeds may actually add to dangers. Just as an example. Road closures such as this simply displace traffic to other roads, often thereby actually increasing traffic of those roads and increasing pollution and possibly decreasing road safety on those roads. Fine for those living in the newly 'protected' roads, not so for others. So my plea for all roads which are actually passable to be used is all about spreading discomfort which may actually decrease 'per household' dangers and pollution. Of course you can plot to make your household particularly safe and pollution free, but only at the expense of others. I'm more in favour of 'equal pain' than 'my gain'.

UK Cards are designed to be used with PINS - where they are contactless then that shouldn't work before they are used (once) with a PIN. These security measure are frequently over-ridden (as they can be with 'card not present' routines using the 3 figure code on the back of the card). The problem with biometric readers is not just the cost of installing biometrics on a card, but the flakiness (still) of the reader technology - which is also expensive. Retailers often don't care, so a card issued to a woman (whose name is obviously female) can be used by a man without challenge. Of course gender identity issues don't help here either.

...and a cyclists and emergency vehicles and if necessary busses free for all - yes.

Given that this morning's delays were the result of accidents (and there have always been accidents, as one would expect on a busy A road) they're irrelevant to the question of the CH closure, aren't they? Actually (and ignoring the spat above) no. The more roads are permanently closed or restricted, the fewer 'alternative' routes exist (for motorists, public conveyances or emergency vehicles) in the case of accident, or, more frequently around here, road closures following infrastructure failure. Every road closed is an 'in emergency' route blocked off. Which means that problems will inevitably be exacerbated. As a local I used to know many routes which allowed me to 'get through' incidents - these are fast disappearing. That can surely be to no one's benefit. I am generally always against reducing flexibility.

Sopers is definitely the best local outlet for wet fish, but I have bought from these guys before (as a one-off, not a regular order) and they're fine - they van down from the North East and their fish is fresh (although, if it's from deep sea trawlers it will already have been frozen on board, so re-freezing might not be a good idea). I found that I wanted to give them a decent order, which meant I over-bought. Also I have no idea how much say, half a kilo of cod actually is. More than I needed, as it turned out!

Not a credit card, but a number of years ago I had a cheque book stolen en route to me - luckily my bank spotted its fraudulent use and I lost nothing, but (although the bank could spot that it was stolen once it had reached (or was on its way to) Sylvester Road DO) - the Post Office did nothing to help, nor show any interest. There were temporary staff there then and a spate of thefts. Because, for some purposes, the law treats items posted 'as if' they had also been delivered (proof of postage being sufficient to argue proof of delivery in some circumstances) Royal Mail seems amazingly reluctant to help where items of value have gone missing. Mind you, that is part and parcel (sorry) with their sister organisation's (PO Counters) disgraceful treatment of sub postmasters, where for years they have been prosecuting individuals for fraud when their own internal electronic accounts system with sub-postmasters must use is known to be faulty.

A previous post of mine which was lounged brought up the issue that the old Borough of Camberwell (where we were before it was merged with the super borough of Southwark) would have been a better place to have stayed - and would at least have had some benefits of administrative scale which your suggestion, attractive as it is, would not. At least we all share an interest in having poor public transport (compared with the north of Southwark).

I have lived in East Dulwich for over 30 years, and in that time the quality of life has improved dramatically. Lordship Lane when I came here was, frankly, shabby, with few decent or interesting restaurants and shops, indeed a plethora of shops selling second hand prams is lodged in my mind (of course, even then, there were gems, and I particularly regret the loss of a decent haberdashers). In that time also public transport has improved (the Orange line, new bus routes). This has been marked by the steepest rise (from a low base) in house prices in London, as more people recognised the pleasures and benefits of living in East Dulwich, with its increasingly vibrant high street, and street market, parks and good (or reparable) housing stock offering quite a good mix of housing types. However in the last couple of years Southwark Council and TfL have been working to reduce that life quality. Reductions in bus frequencies (and routes) and the war against private vehicles are symptomatic of a series of attacks from Tooley St and County Hall which mark a complete disdain for those of us in the south of the borough. Decisions are being made ?against? us by people who probably never even come down South (well, no tubes, so no real access). Our councillors are now part of the apparat, keeping their new-boy noses clean as deselection comes into view. The creation of the super-borough of Southwark and the loss of the Borough of Camberwell looks increasingly a poor decision as regards those of us who would have been in that lost borough. At least the money being grabbed from us who are motorists might have been spent on our transport needs, rather than dissipated in the north. But Southwark has no requirement to spend our car blood money on us in the south. If we are to ?take back control? I know where I?d start. And it?s not on the UK?s borders.

If the side return extension is recently built your neighbour may be trying to soften its impact on his view. Ivy in general on walls (particularly relatively new walls, i.e. not ancient) has very little impact, indeed it tends to protect the wall throwing off rain etc. It is only when it reaches windows or roofs that it can become intrusive or indeed invasive. Where the wall is on a neighbour's boundary growing stuff up it is fair game for him. If the ivy does become invasive (gets under tiles etc.) then your neighbour should give you or your contractors access to cut it back. Growth from a neighbour's property actually into yours can be cut back (by you) to the boundary. Best to do it through agreement, just for good relations.