Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Dear James and fellow Dulwichians,


I was, once again, this morning nearly mown down by a car accelerating along Friern Road. Had I not been cowering in the pavement I would have noted the registration plate and phone the police, but, between the car zooming past and my heart rate returning to normal I thought I would ask a far more useful organ, this forum, for its advice.


The speed ramps presently act as no deterrent, serving only to guide cars down the centre of the road. Please can we have them raised, expanded or otherwise modified so they actually succeed in slowing cars down. There are a couple of primary schools within a couple of dozen metres of Friern Road, and these cars give youngsters very little chance to get our of the way. Failing that, I may create a couple of chicanes from the now outdated Tory/Lib Dem/Labour signs that are slowly being removed from windows.


I think we are in danger of seeing a serious injury on that road - and I think the remedy would be fairly cheap.


Frierntastic

There will always be wreckless drivers whatever anyone does. I personally prefer chicanes to speed humps because humps damage a car axle's tracking (whatever the speed) and most careful drivers are being punished for a few road hogs. The UK has gone speed hump crazy and a lot of them crumble at the edges. The other thing I find works for most drivers are those automated signs that light up as you approach and remind you of the speed limit.
I can't comment on Frien road but the Melbourne Grove "cut through" is simply ridiculous and doesn't even have speed bumps. Instead the council thinks it is far more effective and important to have 2 grown men drive around in a Mr Men car with a camera on a tripod trying to catch people parking in loading bays for 2 mins more than is legal rather than dealing with ignorant drivers haveing no respect for speeding limits. Good work council well done
Speedbumps don't slow reckless drivers. They do penalise the majority of careful drivers (I have a small car and drive slowly but speedbumps have left my car pulling to the left). They encourage people into bigger cars and 4X4 s. They also increase pollution (both noise and carbon dioxide) with all the accerlerating / breaking. There are better solutions, as indicated in previous post.

dubluke Wrote:

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

> Personally I think the speedbumps in Friern road

> are effective, if you drive over them at over say

> 15mph your car gets a good jolt enough to slow you

> down for the next one and about halfway down the

> street they turn into proper sleeping policemen

> anyway!


I fully agree, I live on Friern and have never witnessed anyone speeding up or down the road, as they do in other neighbouring roads. I would hate for these bumps to be raised as they do give you a good jolt as it is.

Vick Wrote:

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

> Speedbumps don't slow reckless drivers. They do

> penalise the majority of careful drivers (I have a

> small car and drive slowly but speedbumps have

> left my car pulling to the left). They encourage

> people into bigger cars and 4X4 s. They also

> increase pollution (both noise and carbon dioxide)

> with all the accerlerating / breaking. There are

> better solutions, as indicated in previous post.



I sympathise with Frierntastic about reckless driving. There are some people who think it's ok to do 60 mph in a built up area.


However, Speed cushions are not the answer. Speed cushions are dangerous as they damage tyres (I had to replace a nearly new set for a recent MOT with barely any wear on the outside and the inner rims down to the casing). What odds a high speed blow out on a motorway?


Overly high speed cushions damage tracking and may cause shock injury to passengers in cars and on buses. They get torn up and crumble on the edges, (there's a couple of beauties on Underhill Rd near St Dunstan's Rd) and further up near Overhill Rd which are SO high they bear the scars of lots of cars bottoming out, broken sump anyone?


They cause potholes nearby due to the extra strain on car shock absorbers. These are dangerous to cyclists and bikers.


Southwark council seem obsessed by them. They recently re-tarmaced Dunstans Road then put humps back on and it's already getting torn up. Meanwhile HUGE potholes get left unrepaired.


Chicanes or the automated signs are MUCH more effective, or even "Shock"..Speed cameras.

I think the speedbumps mentioned by randombloke on Underhill near Overhill are scratched because people seem to drive down there like they are on a race course. If they took it a bit slower I doubt so much damage would happen. I know it's not James Barbers area so he can't help, but the speed some people drive at along Underhill is very alarming (I know it is a hill and the tempatation must be too much for some to resist to floor it, but someone will get hurt at some point). I would personally love to see more effective measures along there to slow everyone down.

If they are the square one's it's not cars that damage them, it's usually because they are poorly built and/ or larger heavy goods vehicles. They do however damage a car's tracking (however slowly you drive over them) and I am fed up of paying ?50 every year at MOT time to have the tracking corrected. If it has to be speed humps then one's that go right accross the road should be the only option but emergency vehicles don't like them for obvious reasons.


Like I and others have said earlier, wreckless drivers don't care what's there, esp if they have no licence or insurance. And even when caught and fined it does nothing to stop them. London has too many people, too many vehicles and too many narrow and residential roads. It's the nature of the beast unfortunately.


Having said that though, the majority of accidents happen on rural roads and are not speed related (according to the dept of transport data) so maybe we are demanding perfection from something that can never be perfect, esp in a busy bustling capital city.

Depends which part of Friern you're on - the section between Goodrich and Lordship Lane has utterly ineffective speed cushions, and we have had many near misses over the years. This block is used as a cut-through by drivers avoiding the lights at Barry Rd/L'ship Lane, and we get a lot of delivery vehicles steaming through at breakneck speeds. When the speed bumps were reviewed two yrs ago, this block was given one extra set of ineffective speed cushions, wheras the rest of Friern got proper speed bumps that actually slow traffic down. I've spoken to the council (engineers) about this on numerous occasions, requesting a speed survey, chicane, closing the road at this end like they've done down the Peckham Rye end (e.g. at Ethrow St - they did it one summer for has works and it was heavenly only having local traffic) - anything ... but nothing's been done. I honestly think it's only a matter of time before there's a fatal accident on this block - I have seen far too many near misses, and with schools at either end of the block, there are scores of children walking up and down and across the road on this block every day... :-(

"Having said that though, the majority of accidents happen on rural roads and are not speed related (according to the dept of transport data)"


No DJKillaQueen. Sorry, but your figs aren't accurate.


I appreciate that you think I'm on your case, I'm not.


Please find attached Road Traffic Accident data from DOT.


58.5% of accidents HAPPEN ON URBAN 'A' ROADS. In England this increases to 60.6%.

DonGee Wrote:

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

> dubluke Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Personally I think the speedbumps in Friern

> road

> > are effective, if you drive over them at over

> say

> > 15mph your car gets a good jolt enough to slow

> you

> > down for the next one and about halfway down

> the

> > street they turn into proper sleeping policemen

> > anyway!

>

> I fully agree, I live on Friern and have never

> witnessed anyone speeding up or down the road, as

> they do in other neighbouring roads. I would hate

> for these bumps to be raised as they do give you a

> good jolt as it is.



I walk up and down Friern twice a day en route to the bus stop. I see people doing speeds which I would deem excessive at least a couple of times a week.

Isn't Friern also within the 20mph speed limit area?

I wonder if anything would slow the type of driver that wants to speed?


Yes full humps can slow emergency vehicles (although police cars have strengthened undercarriages) but they usually take other faster routes - no fire engine will go hurtling down a residential road - they still have to drive safely.


So it seems to me that we have square humps because an emergency vehicle might use that road occasionally, when vans and other large axled vehicles use the same road every day many times over and at any speed they like!


I'm not a fan of humps but at least a single hump going all the way accross the road won't damage the tracking or wear down tyres at one side. Nor will cars drive down the middle of a road and all the other slalom manoevres that cars do to get around the square ones. As a driver I find my eyes are on the humps and not on the road ahead as they should be but can't be when you've got crumbling mini pyramids dotted all over the road.


On the other hand, the council recently put chicanes on a road near me. One chicane is so close to the 90 degree corner into Cheltenham Road that any driver might turn that corner and find themselves head on with a bus straddling the centre of the road as it comes out of that chicane. Even worse there is no cycle feed path at the edge so cyclists are forced into the chicanes too.


Where is the common sense?


One idea I like is to use barriers to make certain residential roads 'no through routes' at certain times of the day, like for example rush hour. An automated barrier could open and close at one end of a road accordingly and then stay closed at weekend when residents are most likely to be at home. They are used in other countries effectively.

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> I shall raise this issue with the Traffic Group

> within Southwark Council.

>

> Renata


What are you planning to raise Renata? The speed of vehicles along Friern Road which will probably result in more Speed Cushions or Humps? Or will you do something about the appalling and dangerous state of many of the roads in and around Dulwich?

The first stage is for an assessment of speeds that are done on a road/area. There are alternatives to speed cushions. In Ivydale Rd and Linden Grove in Nunhead pinch points have been installed to slow down traffic. One problem of these is the loss of several parking spaces with each pinchpoint.



Renata Hamvas


Labour Councillor, Peckham Rye Ward


[email protected]

I can't comment on Frien road but the Melbourne Grove "cut through" is simply ridiculous and doesn't even have speed bumps.


That part of Melbourne Grove doesn't need speed humps or traffic calming. Ever since the council moved all the parked cars onto the road it has become one big pinch point. Anything above 5 MPH is pretty much impossible.


Glad I don't own any of those cars.

Thanks to everyone for posting on this thread - and thank you to Renata for promising to look into this issue. I think the problem seems to manifest itself between Goodrich Road and Lordship Lane - the humps there are completely ineffective.


If it helps, I would be very happy to help in whatever way I can with slowing the speed down. I don't have any children but am acutely aware of the dangers posed to them by speeding on an otherwsie lovely road. I am quite willing to drop leaflets asking residents to slow down, give more information to the council (Renata?) or stand there counting speeding cars if more evidence is required.


FT

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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