Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello, I'm from sydenham. I occasionally go to Foxes. I don't think it's a drug riddled pub.

..no more so than the Castle (as commented upon). Foxes is a bit of a low key locals pub...with just locals. But not enough of them. Maybe jenny could've sparked some life into it.

Perhaps I'm a tad jaded from living here for 15 years...but I'm quite bored of most of the TV set style pubs round here now and even get on a bus/uber to drink in Penge or FH.


The Castle only really for sports but nice and low key for that and always friendly...

That's a terrible way to treat someone.


However in terms solely of the bar take, we looked at putting on gigs there a few years back, and were told there were enough customers on Friday nights and she didn't want any more!!!


And at that time they were looking at having meals in the room upstairs, or so we were told.g

I really like The Castle, it's got a great juke box and good Guinness (I think it's Guinness and not Murphys), but whenever we've been there on a Saturday night it hasn't exactly been heaving.


Even with the incentive of a game of Play Your Cards Right :)


It feels like something from another time. There have been occasions when I've been the only woman in the pub (apart from the bar staff).


I don't know how they could do it, but I actually think they could build on that vibe somehow to attract more people, but the trouble is as soon as a different "type" of person starts going there then inevitably the whole atmosphere will change.


If they do gentrify it, I just really hope it retains some of its present character. I agree The White Horse has managed to somehow have the best of both worlds, with a sensitive makeover.


I wish Jenny all the best wherever she goes. And the rest of the staff - I can't believe they could just sack everybody like that, surely they must be breaking employment law?

We think it's disgusting the way Jenny has been treated after all these years she has worked in the pub, the owners Julia and Ken well that don't surprise me with them 2 I've known them many years ago treat there staff so bad, and they've done it again,,they should be ashamed of themselves. Jenny has worked so hard in that pub for many years, and if anyone is a regular like us both, you would see how lovely she is,,and so helpful to the drinkers, she looks after her drinkers, makes sure they get home safety, she is so friendly and funny... We are so gutted to loose her, I just don't understand why they didn't put the others else where instead. It's never going to be the same again....
Who's to say that the pub will change for the worse everyone seems to be summising about everything-are all these things quoted FACTS or just here say...sometimes a change is as good as a rest and people are changed around in all different jobs for whatever reason.we should give the new person a chance you never know you may like what they do to the place.

I think the main point being made is that existing staff have been compromised, perhaps unfairly.

Who knows what the pub will become.

It's clear the pub could accommodate many more customers.

It's got the space, location and potential to become a viable profit-making enterprise.

So glad I seen this forum and got a chance to make my opinion heard, I have drank in the castle and other pubs in se London including Two of which Mary the 65 year old used to run, and if all the 150 so called people who signed the petition did there homework about the new manager they would realise she is a much loved caring family woman who goes above and beyond for her customers and has turned around pubs she's managed so although I'm sure Jenny was good as castles landlady, don't believe everything you get told..., I for one will be in the castle a lot more now Mary will be running it, and wish her and Jenny the best of luck

I would like to say that since Jenny took over the pub she turned it around so much that where as the police were always there it was very rare to see them, Putting a 65 year old in as manager is beyond belief, the old crowd of rif raffs will soon be back and then us residents who live so close to the pub will start involving the police again, Jenny was one of the best managers and made sure us residents was not disturbed by loud and nuisance drinkers, Jenny i know you will do well where ever you go lets hope all your regulars boycott the pub now.

,

beejay Wrote:

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

> I would like to say that since Jenny took over the

> pub she turned it around so much that where as the

> police were always there it was very rare to see

> them, Putting a 65 year old in as manager is

> beyond belief, the old crowd of rif raffs will

> soon be back and then us residents who live so

> close to the pub will start involving the police

> again, Jenny was one of the best managers and

> made sure us residents was not disturbed by loud

> and nuisance drinkers, Jenny i know you will do

> well where ever you go lets hope all your regulars

> boycott the pub now.

>



What on earth has age got to do with it?


65 isn't old.


Hope I never run into you in The Castle.


It's ability which is important, not age. Or do you think people wake up on their 65th (or 30th,40th or 50th) birthdays suddenly incapable of doing a particular job?


FFS.


Certainly some 65 year olds couldn't run a pub. Nor could some 40 year olds. I sincerely hope you've never been involved in recruiting people, if you ignore all their skills and successes and chuck their application in the bin on the basis of the year they were born.


ETA: And as for boycotting the pub - yes, a quick way to make sure it closes down, isn't it? Cutting off your nose to spite your face springs to mind.

I completely agree with you Sue and I am disgusted by the discrimination and judgement that beejay and any other haters portray. Would you call your own mother an old crow at 65? Thought not, so don't be so insulting!


I know the lady who is about to take over The Castle and with her 30 years of experience, I do not doubt that she will be successful. I would also like to point out that she IS NOT 65 years old and every single pub that she has saved from closure has been achieved by hard work, determination, working closely with the local community and licencing and police authorities.


Did it not cross anyone's mind that this may just be a last chance to save this much loved pub? with the current stats proving that 29 pubs are closing each week (November 2015 stats) I think it's only fair that you look beyond the gossip, spite, rumours and hurtful comments and support your local pub where ever it may be. After all, the last thing any of us South Londoners want is another 'yuppie pub/bar' or even worst another block of flats!


I have met Jenny and wish her luck in her new ventures.

Jenny has left the building, as have all the staff, by choice. It's been informative to see the variety of views of the pub, Jenny, ageism (sic) and the general state of play of pubs in general and locally in particular. My family and friends have used this pub for nigh on 40 years, pre-dating Jenny for sometime. I used to have a successful gastropub in W London and still have a licence... I've also been on the receiving end of pubcos outlook.


My biggest issue is what can this obviously experienced new landlady bring to the site that is not already there. The owners don't do gastro and the alternate offer to Jenny was amongst the lowest turnover pubs in the group of @ 40. If this lady is so talented then why is she not directed to a site that is ailing, i.e. Foxes ? Nothing to do with being near her property in Herne Hill? If they want to run it down to ease a sale then they will run the gauntlet of ACV.


The underhand methods that have been used are despicable and ruined Jenny and her family's life. A weeks notice..?

I won't give my money to such a company


I thank her for the service and friendship over the years and wish her clan all the best for the future.

The loss of Jenny has already impacted on the 'locals'. Jenny's enthusiasm, quest to please attitude, was abundantly clear. Bar staff knew their trade, enjoyed the work and the customers. I have witnessed her family grow up and the pub evolve during her stewardship.

The Castle, now managed, with indifferent staff, together with the 'scallywags', barred from Jenny's era, back in, bodes a very worrying future.

Regrettably Jenny's contribution to the Castle vibe was paramount, but not given enough recognition.

I, and many others, miss her, and feel guilty for using the Castle, but it's still our local.

We've already noticed the difference. We have had 3 years of no problems and suddenly it's noisy at night and waking us up. The clientelle has cleary changed although perhaps that's just because the Euros has started. Here is hoping it settles down. Although after less than a week...we're missing the old guard.

I'm not sure we have the full picture of what happened and what led up to this.


I really can't believe there can have been no warning of any kind.


If there wasn't, surely Jenny could take them to a tribunal?


Though I suppose if they offered her an alternative job they had fulfilled their obligations:(

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...