Penguin68

No, I meant those choosing to say nasty and dismisive things about either the OP or their nanny.

IF there was no actual abduction attempt then the nanny was probably right not to immediately involve the police, but to discuss this with the parents (assuming this is what happened) and the parents right to report what might have been (but apparently actually wasn't) a worrying incident. Everybody thus seems to have acted sensibly and in proportion. Except perhaps for some posters here.

BT Broadband (Infinity 2) working fine here - what do you mean by BT WiFI? - do you mean your own broadband system which has a WiFi router or are you relying on publicly provided WiFi by BT? Amended to add - South end of Underhill past the cemetery

For all those of us who are taxpayers (including those {not now} travelling with Govia] - the paltry compensation you will be paid for having no service is coming out of your tax, not Govia's profits. Govia, the RMT and ASLEF wish you one and all a very crappy Christmas (especially those who thought they were travelling by train to Gatwick), and a ghastly New Year. And they intend to deliver on their promises.

NB Zebedee - I was not 'attacking' the nanny - but trying to explain why her actions might have a perfectly reasonable basis, given speculation about her possible background.

We know nothing about this 'nanny' - but it is quite possible that she is rather more an au pair than a nanny - in which case it is also likely that (a) English is not her first language and that (b) she is not au fait with the methods of reporting activities to the police - indeed she may have had a concern that doing so without discussing this with her employers might have led to trouble for her - other country's attitude to the involvement of police, particularly where these are of a state or militarised nature are very different from ours. She may also come from a country where child abduction (or the fears surrounding this) is/ are less common. Indeed I would argue that it is quite unlikely that a trained (i.e. NNEB or similar) nanny would have acted in this way.

NOT GOOD SE23 and 26 being re-routed - but the message for SE22 is #SE22 We are still trying to reroute supplies and looking into arranging bottled water and pick up location soon. Next update at 5.30PM

Thank you grahamdixonwayne - I'm not participative on Twitter (I have an ID, I never use it) - a social network too far for me.

Did they say pm? - 'cos there hasn't been an update on the site - still quoting an 07:45 bulletin. A 'live' lady on the phone also hadn't seen any updates - said SE22, 23 and 26 were all impacted - said they aimed to clear in 12 hours (well, of course they do, it costs them after that, and they have to provide water bowsers etc.). But there are so many reported leaks shown on the plot that it is difficult to guess which one may be impacting which houses. The site says the leak is in SE23 - but many report it as being in SE22. Whatever, it is the only one where work is meant to be taking place - anyone see anyone working?

About 12-15 years ago DC boys expected to be mugged for their phones about every 3 months (no really!) - that was when mobile ownership wasn't quite so wide-spread. Around then one of my daughters was mugged for her phone, but it was so old and manky the mugger gave it back and advised her to 'get her dad to buy a decent one!'. She was about 15 at the time. She was also attacked (in the Rye) - another attempted mugging - when she was about 6 or 7, and walking with friends. She fought back (she was slightly injured) and they scared the attackers (a group of older girls) off. She toured round later with the police but couldn't see her attackers. I'm afraid this recent event is deplorable, but doesn't mark a sudden descent into barbarism - for this area it's 'same old, same old'.

This is where the water isn't

No running water, no trains, I'm sorry but now in East Dulwich we are having third world problems!

The map does not show the extent of the impact, which includes parts of Underhill and Woodvale. I was told that operatives had been dispatched but had not yet arrived, and that a tanker had also been dispatched to re-charge the main if necessary. I suspect that the map shown may refer to an earlier leak this week, which did not impact Underhill or Woodvale.

...and of course Labour is wholly sympathetic to the commuters' plight... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3740047/Labour-leader-Jeremy-Corbyn-backs-strikes-Southern-Rail-Eurostar-despite-walkout-causing-misery-thousands-commuters.html (yes, I know its the Daily Mail - but the other is the Grauniad - so fair play!)

Rowans will certainly grow into trees (as will, e.g. hazel) - but I have what is definitely still a bush, self sown, in my garden. Some species have bright red berries, others do have orange. Rowans are deciduous (I think all of them are) so if the 'bush' is loosing/ has lost its leaves then it may be that, Cotoneasater is evergreen (see illustration)

Do you mean rowan (mountain ash) trees?

No, this would be Jeremy's choice https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/06/cuba-coffee-peas

Morrisons backed out because they decided to withdraw from all 'convenience' stores - they weren't very good at it - it had nothing to do with this specific location - most recent news suggests that they may go back into this market using their Safeway Brand (which they own) - probably not in good time for this particular site.

I thought I was clear that no new tax is being proposed. I think it's fair to use as a short hand the removal of an exemption/ allowance (and interest charges to be offset against business revenues has always been an exemption) as a 'new' tax. It is certainly a new extension of tax into an area previously un-taxed. I suspect that where the rentier incorporated his/ her business so that the properties belonged to a registered company, then interest charges may still be exempt from taxation - the encouragement for the big beasts would be to do so in an company registered abroad. And of course taxation would be at company tax levels - shortly to be below basic rate (but without the tax-free allowance). If interest rates rise then this would be interesting as a tax position - even where you would be paying both corporation tax and then (presumably) Dividend tax for dividends over the new tax-free limits.

The problem is that tax changes for buy-to-let properties were all about increasing the number of properties available for first-time or buy-to-live households - so benefiting JAMs in a different way. HOWEVER there isn't just one 'buy-to-let' tax. Allowances to offset mortgage interest against income is the most likely tax change making an impact here - the landlord is planning to increase rentals to offset the 'lost' tax allowance for mortgage interest as an allowable expense - the other change is to increase stamp duty on second (and subsequent) properties, but that should impact properties in an existing portfolio. Selling off properties (back into the first-time and buy to live market) is exactly what the policy was intended to stimulate. And note that Osborne belonged to a previous administration not focused (at least in PR terms) on JAMs - so he cannot be blamed (even incorrectly) for instituting a change which might impact a policy not of his making and not part of his remit.

..or for Thali sets - these would work very well, perhaps with some additional thali bowls https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Thali+sets&oq=thali&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j69i59j0l4.3535j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Maybe warning signage about narrowing would help (I don't think it's already there)

Bummi at East Dulwich practice is lovely. My family would confirm that.

Now that the weather is finally changing, and before there are any too sharp winds, those who haven't should catch the autumn colour in Court Lane. There are some very fine trees, particularly maples, which are tremendous - but which will have little more now to give, I fear.

The damage has clearly got worse, and the wall seems now much further 'out of true'. That instability coupled with a high wind (or the continued jolting of heavy vehicles) has clearly added to the danger. If the builders wished to leave the wall, for the moment, then it should have been stabilised with strapping of some kind.