Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This subject has been going on for some time and there are verious issues all of which are in the hands of Southwark.James Barber is fully aware of the situation but can only act within the 'rules'.As it stands officialy Dulwich Van Hire can continue to trade using the public road as storage but are limited to parking 8 vans on the surounding streets.


So as far as Southwark are concerned Dulwich Van Hire are doing what has been asked of them and continue to trade without restriction from Barrys Off Licence.


I do not accept that this kind of activity can be allowed and would urge all affected to contact James Barber directly to air your veiws.



MN

I don't believe they should be able to trade as a van hire business withough having suitable premises on which to store their vans (not on the already overcrowded surrounding residential streets).


When they applied for planning permission to change the use of the site on Barry Rd from business to residential, my understanding was that they forfeited the right to trade as a business from there, yet they effectively continue to do so. You can't have your cake (the residential development of the business site and taking the profit from that) and eat it (continuing to run the business despite not having sufficient space to do so) IMO.


I'm not sure what the latest is though.

I agree with Mellors.


Please let James Barber know your views.I have contacted various departments at Sowthwark and it is difficult to find the right people to talk to.The crew at Parking Enforcement were as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.


MN

Hi James


Taking my dodgy Hat off for a moment as this is something that needs to be looked into as at times I have noticed 4 Dulwich Van hire vans parked in Upland road, and equivelent numbers in Barry road.


can you let everyone know what the Planning Enforcement team are doing about hte situation, what they have said and also what actual powers they have to enforce with ?


Many thanks

  • 2 weeks later...

I think the idea can be revisited because the vehicles are effectively unsold but tradeable commercial goods.


It's thoroughly against the law to use the public highway for commercial storage.


I'd like to see the same law being used to get rid of estate agents' fanny wagons.

Hi, this is Shine from Barry's Off Licence.


It has been brought to my attention by a customer, that the residents of Upland Road have been facing a severe inconvenience from Dulwich Van Hire. Therefore I have spoken to the manger today of Dulwich Van Hire and have informed him of the inconvenience they have been causing, and have requested that no Vans should be parked on Upland Road as of immediate affect.


I have also told him that they have to find a permanent residence for their Vans other than the local residential parking or we will not be able to offer them office space at Barry's any longer. I have given them one month to do this.


Barry?s has always been a community shop which has been established for 30 years. We have a very loyal, trusted and supportive customer base and as you all know we are all very approachable people. So, please if you any queries or problems concerning Barry?s Off Licence please contact us either, by visiting the shop, via email: [email protected] or via a phone call: 02082990443. I have now also signed on to east Dulwich forum where I will also be available for contact


Thank you very much.


Kind regards. Shine Bedi.

Hi this is Shine again from Barrys Off Licence.


I have been in constant contact with the Dulwich Van Hire management, and have made it thoroughly clear to them that the Vans have to be moved off the local residential streets as soon as possible as I do understand that they have moved away from Upland Road to other nearby streets.


I know this extremely frustrating for our local residents; however I do feel I am getting through to them. Keep you all updated.


Thank you for all your support.

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> maybe they could move into the old wood yard when

> it is cleared as a temporary home till they find

> somewhere else ?


This is a great idea. Joined up thinking etc.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...