Jump to content

Recommended Posts

steveo Wrote:

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

> However, I'm sure they'd represent any tenant who

> didn't need legal aid or pro bono.

>

> Or who was a tenant of an existing client.



the existing client being the landlord - Steveo throw away your spade, you are out of your depth - literally and figuratively

Surely a law firm should WANT to take it down once they realise they (perhaps inadvertently - maybe they just asked Londis for permission?) have infringed a law. I don't see what else they could do but take it down themselves, otherwise they've compromised their own integrity.

Shaila Shah Wrote:

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

> I think if they don't have permission, the sign

> should come down. If it is supposed to be

> directional,then maybe a mini road map showing ALL

> the retailers and businesses on NX Road should be

> put up in its place.


Excellent idea, but to be useful would have to be kept up to date. I am unclear who exactly has flouted the planning regulations: the owners of the wall who have allowed the sign to be erected on their property, and no doubt charging rent, or the solicitors.

I suggest the Community Council invite a representative of the relevant department to explain to the bewildered public exactly how 'visual harm' is defined, how it is measured, what the threshold of 'sufficiency' is, who and how decided on that threshold, details of any consultation held and, of course, documentary proof that the Council has never enforced against anything objectively measured as being below that threshold.


I'm sure they'd be delighted that we're so interested in their work, and be eager to explain.


And, if not, at least we'll know who they're really working for.

Burbage Wrote:


>

> I'm sure they'd be delighted that we're so

> interested in their work, and be eager to

> explain.



I still can't believe that anyone is. In fact, I can't actually believe this conversation is still going on and we haven't got anything better to do (myself included).... (yawn)

Cedges Wrote:

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

> Its been there years - who cares - move on and spend our tax payer money dealing with things that

> actually matter please.


The problem is that this sort of thing sets precedents. If more people decide to put up advertising boards and charge rent for them, they will use this one and say that the council tacitly approved it via inaction.

steveo Wrote:

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

> Mr Army: My original response was wrong and I

> admitted it. What I meant was that Glazer Delmar

> will work for anyone who can afford to pay them.

>

> And I suspect you knew that was what I meant


hello steveo, I did not say I could not afford the advice from GD, it would not matter, they do not represent or work for the tenant, and this wry throw away line of mine has gathered speed. It was an alert as much as anything. Thank you for your reply, the sign will, I suspect, stay.

Sue Wrote:

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

> Elphinstone's Army Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> Steveo

> > throw away your spade, you are out of your depth

> -

> > literally and figuratively

>

Yes ! you are quite right Sue, where that came from who knows, thanks for pointing it out, Confused by Idioms!


>

> How can he be "literally" out of his depth?

>

> Unless he is presently in water?!

This is a test case. The thin end of the wedge. The droplet before the deluge.


If we don't come together and make a stand, shitty walls everywhere will be festooned with shiny signs and it is the children - our little ones - who will pay for our indolence.

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

    • Hello! We are relocating abroad and so will be withdrawing our two children (ages 4 and 6) from St Dunstan’s College (Catford). If any family is considering enrolling children of a similar age, now would be an excellent opportunity—we’re required to pay full‑term fees unless the places are taken. Please get in touch if you’re interested or know someone who might be. Thank you!
    • Hi  I really thought I'd seen a more recent post on the forum about home education meet ups. I can't find it though. Hope some of these might provide leads. https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/137603-home-schooling-advice-anyone-wants-to-do-it-together/#comment-1092093 Very old post but group seems still to exist: https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/92044-home-education-local-group/#comment-954837 You could try contacting this forum member: https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/325368-classroom-support-for-home-education-community/#comment-1621064 Two of these left for right now: https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/events/event/1025-🌟-teens-11-try-painting-sculpture-street-art-at-holiday-workshops/
    • Thanks for your reply. I’ve subscribed to Ancestry a few times in the past but felt I wasn’t using it enough to warrant keeping up the subscription.    
    • Hi, I saw your post and just wanted to say that the incident you’re referring to did happen in the late 1980s at Dawson’s Heights. The person involved was named Carl Salawa, and he had just turned 18 years old at the time. Like you, I haven’t been able to find any news articles or official reports about it, If anyone remembers anything more about that time or incident, I’d really appreciate hearing about it. Thanks for sharing what you were told—it means a lot to know others remember.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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