Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jenny Rubie, the manager of the Castle in Crystal Palace Road, has been forced out by her brewery and leaves next Tuesday. She has been there for 11 years as manager and 5 more before that. She was given a week's notice. A 65 year old woman who is not from anywhere near here and has been with the company for 5 years and had 4 different pubs is coming..


This is a community, traditional pub, the only one left in ED and the loss of a lynchpin of the area is a disgrace. She was offered the Foxes pub in Sydenham, a known druggie pub that takes less than half in turnover compared to the Castle. It was a derisory, insulting offer that could not be countenanced.


A petition has been started and signed by over 150 people in a week. Please register a protest with: [email protected]

They believe they can take loads more money. Don't know how, it's a sports bar and the amount of regulars who'll walk away will be replaced with the number of barred druggies that Jenny kept clear... company politics too.. Whilst they had manager meetings there, it appears that several of them were jostling for the spot and Jenny was the last to know..

No respect for loyalty

I heard about this last week and I've also heard they've sacked all other staff too. It's a bloody disgrace. Jenny is a part of the furniture and fittings of The Castle just like Mary was before her. I expect a refurb is imminent and the pub will be turned into another boring homogenised pub like the rest of them around East Dulwich.

The Castle was the last 'old man's' pub. Seeing the success of the CPT's repositioning as the Great Exhibition, its not surprising the owners are tempted to try a new strategy that will generate more business.


For those of you who go to the Castle, how busy is it? It always looks fairly empty whenever I pass it.


Its a bit harsh to criticize the new style of pubs. They are full, which means they are giving people what they want and there are differences between them.

I feel sorry for the Manager and the existing staff who are being pushed out. I used to like the Castle(great that it has a pool table / dart board) but i was put off following the last refurb, by the number of TV screens that were installed. I like to go to the pub to escape the TV personally. I hope they don't change it too much though. The White Horse in Peckham is a good example of an update which brings in new customers without driving out the old.

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> Its a bit harsh to criticize the new style of

> pubs. They are full, which means they are giving

> people what they want


Well.. they're giving some people what they want... but not everyone wants the same thing.

Not everyone wants the same thing of course. If what the Castle is doing doesn't appeal to enough people to fill up the pub (even though its the only place offering its style of pub), that says it all though.


If there was really a significant demand, it would be full and it would remain open as is.

I'd say the castle is usually pretty busy.


I also heard about this last week, and I think it's an absolutely shocking way to treat someone. Bare in mind this is more than just her job she's losing. And it's not just an old man's pub FFS. Unless by "old man" you just mean people who's faces don't fit in the other "pubs" of ED.


Although I do disagree with the OP about Fox's, I've used it a lot and never seen any drug use going on (unlike most of the places on Lordship Lane).


But that's not really the point anyway. A very very nice lady is being treated in a bloody shocking manner.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Clearly the brewery agree with you, LM!

>

> I assume by arranging this petition, people are

> hoping to appeal to their altruistic side... so

> good luck with that...




Indeed, can't see anything changing their decision, but it still stinks.


I hardly get down to drink in ED these days, but the castle is the only place left in the area where I can walk in and the bar staff greet me warmly by name. Sad to lose that.


And my old man is really gutted.

Otta, do you think the owners are planning to revamp the pub? If its really busy, then why would they do that?


If the other pub she's been offered isn't that bad, why doesn't she want to go there? Is it a matter of principal because she's been at the Castle forever and doesn't feel she should be expected to move- genuine question?


By 'old man's pub' I just mean not a modern pub (of which there are many varieties around here). I actually think the most diverse and welcoming pub in the area is the EDT. Anytime I go by there is a mixture of young and old, different races, different sexual orientations, middle and working class etc.

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> Otta, do you think the owners are planning to

> revamp the pub? If its really busy, then why

> would they do that?



My guess (and it's only a guess) is that they'll want to introduce food and will knock it through like they did with the CPT/TGE.




>

> If the other pub she's been offered isn't that

> bad, why doesn't she want to go there?




Probably because she lives at the castle and doesn't want to live at the other pub.


Or maybe it is that bad and I'd just not seen it, I haven't used it that much in the last 2 years.

It?s appalling how pubcos treat the people who make them their money, but ?wet-led? pubs are struggling and shutting all over the place, not just in ED and the like. To put an optimistic gloss on this, as has been suggested above, the White Horse looks promising as a compromise between the old and the new which could be replicated elsewhere. We had a fine Friday night pint or three there the other week.


And it?s not quite fair to tar all the pubs of East Diulwich with the ?boring homogenised? brush either. We're fond of the EDT and *whisper it softly* it?s home to quite a few old-style clientele who are more than happy to make it their local.


Bet Louisa's bursting to join this thread ;-)

Otta Wrote:

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

> My guess (and it's only a guess) is that they'll

> want to introduce food and will knock it through

> like they did with the CPT/TGE.


I would guess similar. Food, and higher margin booze "offerings".


If this is the company's plan then that is up to them I guess. But did they speak with the current manager to see if she'd be willing to work with them on this?

I think it is a shame she is going. I was in last weekend to see the Millwall game and Jen knew usual I wanted my usual pint of Guiness. That doesn't happen much these days. It is a pub where builders and workers can have a drink at the end of the day. There is a working class element and sometimes the language can get a little ripe, though now one seems to mind. There is quite a mix of ages and backgrounds. Jenny has tried various activities such as the poker nights and the live music. Often local funerals start and finish at the pub. She also got rid of a small element who appeared to have been dealing in the toilets. The pub could do with a bit of a smarten up but I would not want to see it become a place like the recently refurbished pub on Forest Hill Road with its so called 'craft ales' many that taste unpleasant and cost ?6 a pint.


Regards


Councillor Charlie Smith

East Dulwich Ward Member

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> It is ridiculous to suggest that all pubs in ED

> are the same.



I completely agree.


But they do all have one thing in common, and that's that a lot of the people that use the castle don't feel comfortable in any of them.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> But did they speak with the current

> manager to see if she'd be willing to work with

> them on this?



Obviously I don't know for sure, but from what I've hear, no. She just got her marching orders because they feel she's not bringing enough money in.

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

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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