Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Why waste the local taxpayers money on repairing the pavements on LL?The paved areas directly to the front of most of the businesses on LL are the responsibility of the leaseholder/freeholder/occupier. Greedy businesses are happy to make a fortune by putting tables outside, serving food outside, having mobile vehicles parked outside, having goods outside, ugly trip hazard advertising etc ad infinitum to increase their profits so let them repair what they are responsible for.

The greedy pretend to be community spirited when it comes to thinking up more ways to increase profit such as Dulwich fest, xmas scams, etc so lets see some real community spirit and let them repair what they are responsible for.

And to anyone that has had an accident, forget the council-the local business is responsible for all within their curtilage which includes their shopfronts, see the owners for your compy not the tax payer.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/126352-pavement-lordship-lane/
Share on other sites

Why does running a business selling goods you want to buy make them "greedy" and "profiteering"? And if they own the area why can't they put their displays or tables and chairs out? It's hardly a trip hazard is it? And since when was Christmas a scam? If you don't like it, don't buy anything.

Maybe you misread..


DirtyBox wrote

> Why does running a business selling goods you want to buy make them "greedy" and "profiteering"?


Making excessive money, charging unreasonably high prices.

Greedy as not using their excessive profits to upkeep their pavement within their curtilage that their customers use to hand over silly money


> if they own the area why can't they put their displays or tables and chairs out?


They can, and do, in an attempt to sucker in more people to pay extortionate prices/have space to oversell more crap to increase profiteering profits so why cant they use part of their profits to fix up their pavements for which theyre responsible hence they can put all types of crap on it as they own it


>And since when was Christmas a scam?


Since these greedy profiteering capatalist shopkeeps started having xmas trails, donkeys etc in another cynical attempt at wheedling more money out of you whilst still not repairing or maintaining the pavements in good order. You know, the pavements that they are responsible for!


I recall a while ago the furore created by ED because a black man, the owner of a black business now and again placed a car for sale on his bit of the pavement, that he owned. The car was not a problem, the pavement was maintained etc yet EDFERS contacted barber, the council etc and got this stopped even though no problem. I wonder why that was??? But a mobile chicken roastting van outside a shop is not a problem is it?


Pavement in disrepair that is the responsibility of the shopkeeps is now being called for to be an issue for the council and not the shop??? I suspect that the edefers calling for barber and council to repair paving that is not their responsibility using local tax revenue are actually greedy profiteering business owners using forum poster identities so they do not have to fulfill their freehold/leasehold responsibilty.

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

    • Eh? That wasn't "my quote"! If you look at your post above,it is clearly a quote by Rockets! None of us have any  idea what a Corbyn led government during Covid would have been like. But do you seriously think it would have been worse than Johnson's self-serving performance? What you say about the swing of seats away from Labour in 2019 is true. But you have missed my point completely. The fact that Labour under Corbyn got more than ten million votes does not mean that Corbyn was "unelectable", does it? The present electoral system is bonkers, which is why a change is apparently on the cards. Anyway, it is pointless discussing this, because we are going round in circles. As for McCluskey, whatever the truth of that report, I can't see what it has to do with Corbyn?
    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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