Jump to content

Recommended Posts

martin Wrote:

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

> so does this mean the organic veg guy on

> northcross road who puts out cones is actually

> acting outside of the law and anybody can remove

> them and park there... and if he gets shirty the

> old bill can be called?


The florist shop also does the same thing.

Yes but to be fair to those business', they reserve those spaces only during work hours solely because they need to and not for purely whimsical, selfish purposes. The cones are gone after 6 so I don't really think it's a fair to 'have a go at them' even if it is technically illegal....

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> No person legally can 'reserve' the public

> highway. Just move them to the curb and park. If

> cone owner comes out and protests tell them to do

> one or you'll call the Police......sorted.


That's not strictly true :-

*Buy a house with a large front garden.

*Knock the wall down and drive in!

*Bung the Council a few hundred pounds to drop the curb and paint a white line.

*Shout at anyone who dares park across your drive - even if your car's not there.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> martin Wrote:

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

> -----

> > so does this mean the organic veg guy on

> > northcross road who puts out cones is actually

> > acting outside of the law and anybody can

> remove

> > them and park there... and if he gets shirty

> the

> > old bill can be called?

>

> Yes. he has no legal right to reserve the public

> highway for his own use over others.


He sells nice produce, is called Chris Pretty and I reckon is far removed from the the person the OP was complaining about inasmuch as he is providing a service/running a business and should of course be allowed 'informally' and with the good will of the community to park up and unload his van.

Too many shagging personal vehicles in the burgh anyway, at least his serves a purpose.


*sits back, swigging down a 7UP while awaiting a post (or posts) containing the words 'in principle' 'in theory' and 'no legal right to use the public highway for his own use over others'*

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> LOL 2sheds....I think it costs more than a few

> hundred to have the curb dropped but yes a white

> line means no parking. Not the same as putting

> cones onto the road though :)


Bit of a side issue really as this thread should be about cones but, just in case anyone should take away the wrong idea about white lines in front of off-street parking; the white line is actually only advisory, it doesn't have any legal status. It is the drop kerb that makes it illegal to park in front of someone's driveway. It is illegal to park against a drop kerb wherever they exist - I wish more drivers would remember that when they park adjacent to drop kerbs at road junctions, thereby causing an obstruction for anyone using or pushing a wheelchair who wants to cross from one pavement to the next. Rant over. 2sheds is right; if you want to reserve the space in front of your house, spend approx ?1K to get a pavement crossing and drop kerb and no one can park there. I don't mind anyone putting out cones on occasion (we've all had a need at times) as long as they accept gracefully when they get moved.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> He sells nice produce, is called Chris Pretty and

> I reckon is far removed from the the person the OP

> was complaining about inasmuch as he is providing

> a service/running a business and should of course

> be allowed 'informally' and with the good will of

> the community to park up and unload his van.


But why should he have special dispensation, from the 'community' of all people who don't own the highway either? What if every shop/ business put cones outside their premises preventing anyone else from parking somewhere they are legally allowed to park?....


If he wants a private parking space he has to pay for it, just like everybody else.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> -----

> > martin Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > so does this mean the organic veg guy on

> > > northcross road who puts out cones is

> actually

> > > acting outside of the law and anybody can

> > remove

> > > them and park there... and if he gets shirty

> > the

> > > old bill can be called?

> >

> > Yes. he has no legal right to reserve the

> public

> > highway for his own use over others.

>

> He sells nice produce, is called Chris Pretty and

> I reckon is far removed from the the person the OP

> was complaining about inasmuch as he is providing

> a service/running a business and should of course

> be allowed 'informally' and with the good will of

> the community to park up and unload his van.

> Too many shagging personal vehicles in the burgh

> anyway, at least his serves a purpose.

>

> *sits back, swigging down a 7UP while awaiting a

> post (or posts) containing the words 'in

> principle' 'in theory' and 'no legal right to use

> the public highway for his own use over others'*



Poor HonaloochieB - didn't take long for someone to quote that (as you already predicted).


I hear what you're saying and I thoroughly agree. Providing a (valued) community service is a whole lot different from being a selfish, lazy motherfucker and putting cones outside your own house for personal use.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Every time I go into Pretty Traditional there are

> different staff serving .

> I wonder about the high turnover .


Perhaps they get fed up at not being able to park outside.

dennis Wrote:

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

> Would the gracious folk of EDF be equally

> accommodating to Mr Sainsbury if he coned off the

> area adjacent to his Dulwich Plough shop from 9 to

> 5pm ? Debatably he also provides a "valued

> community service".


Absolutely not, Mr Sainsbury would see a different side of the GF of ED.

In fact they would rise up as one and ride him out of town on a rail if he so much as looked as if he was thinking about considering such raw work.

Probably.

But Chris Pretty is part of the gracious folk posse and can park outside his shop all he wants.

dennis Wrote:

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

> Would the gracious folk of EDF be equally

> accommodating to Mr Sainsbury if he coned off the

> area adjacent to his Dulwich Plough shop from 9 to

> 5pm ? Debatably he also provides a "valued

> community service".


i agree with this - people don't run shops for the good of the community, they run them to make money for themselves

pk Wrote:

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

> dennis Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Would the gracious folk of EDF be equally

> > accommodating to Mr Sainsbury if he coned off

> the

> > area adjacent to his Dulwich Plough shop from 9

> to

> > 5pm ? Debatably he also provides a "valued

> > community service".

>

> i agree with this - people don't run shops for the

> good of the community, they run them to make money

> for themselves


The two needn't be mutually exclusive, though but.

I never use Chris Petty's services and nor do the vast majority of local residents no doubt...so yes of course he should have a special privilege because a few people say so...that's like me saying my local newsagent should cone off the road outside his shop because he privides me with a service......he has NO automatic RIGHT to cone off the Road and I really can't understand why anyone thinks differently.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> I never use Chris Petty's services and nor do the

> vast majority of local residents no doubt...so yes

> of course he should have a special privilege

> because a few people say so...that's like me

> saying my local newsagent should cone off the road

> outside his shop because he privides me with a

> service......he has NO automatic RIGHT to cone off

> the Road and I really can't understand why anyone

> thinks differently.


I never said he had a right DJKQ, but he does it and I don't care that he does.

As for the vast majority of ED residents not using his shop, I'm glad the 'No Riff Raff' sign is working.

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> I never said he had a right DJKQ, but he does it

> and I don't care that he does.


i agree with that:


does he have a right? no


does he do it for the community? no


is it worth me getting upset about? no, i don't care

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 thoroughly recommend Jay from JK Electrical Contractors who is an NICEIC registered. NICEIC is the UK's leading certification body for the electrical contracting industry and conducts regular audits and assessments on all its members. It is the specialist trade body which certifies professional electricians.  Jay completed the installation of a 19 way consumer unit for us and works to the highest standards and our entire electrical installation is now fully compliant with 18th Edition of the electrical wiring regulations. Before installing the new CU he traced and corrected faults that had developed over the last 25 years -some of which were my DIY bodges that were non-compliant.  We now have an installation that is 100% safe and  reliable . His contact details are :- 0208 150 6450 [email protected] Here is what he installed for us.
    • I fully support this petition, however it will need to be shared far & wide to be effective. Also there is always a huge amount of interest / objection during the festival, but not so much when they start consulting for the next one, usually around January. It's crucial that everyone that has been impacted makes their voice heard then.  A couple of points which may be good to include in the wording (if it is still possible to amend?) - The total tickets sold are way more than 3000. The licence allows a capacity of up to 9,999, but this may include staff & performers etc. The published attendance for 2024 was:  Friday – 8,999 / Saturday – 9,512 / Sunday – 9,422 So that's c.28,000 people trampling & littering our park over three days - people who have no need or desire to take any care or consideration of our park.  - Gala claim for 2024 that "62% of all ticket holders were from Southeast London and 18% of these were from hyper-local postcode areas SE15 and SE22." So a bit of maths shows that means that around 89% of attendees were not what most people would term 'local'... - Gala have ambitions / plans to extend the number of event days to 6, over two weekends. They applied for a licence for this in 2024, but then withdrew it. Instead they added a "free" event, billed as a community day, to the existing 3 day festival, thereby increasing the event days to 4.  This would appear to be an attempt to set a precedent for increasing the number of event days, and it's inevitable that they will attempt to secure the 6 days they desire for 2026, to increase their profits further. Two weekends in a row of noise, disturbance & disruption would be unacceptable, plus an extra c.18,000 trampling & littering the park... - The site size has been increased. The claim is that it is to compensate for lost storage space due to recent flood alleviation works, but the area has increased by more than the area lost, and appears to have been used for attendee activity rather than site storage. Gala have often stated that the festival can only be located in the park because the footprint has been designed specifically for that area, and yet this year the footprint had been amended & extended without any apparent issues. Surely this proves that it could be relocated?  Apologies, I just can't help going into rant mode on this issue, but hopefully some of the above may be helpful in increasing the argument presented by the petition?
    • Best to just get in touch with the council. You need to see what works were approved and the scope.  It's probably advisable to get an independent legal survey (not a standard RICS) and look at current condition, what they said they'd fix, if they did what they said and what the problems are with what they did. Was it just your flat and the other flat mentioned? Asking in case there's any other leaseholder/ tenant involved  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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