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

    • 🤣 at the puns. Seriously though, thank you for not assuming he must be lost just because he followed you a long way. Thank you for posting on here rather than  taking him back to your house!
    • I'm disgusted and outraged...at the Telegraph. I'd much rather have sex parties happening around the corner than have some of the Telegraph's oligarch owners infesting the neighbourhood. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/may/14/foreign-states-limited-to-15-stake-in-uk-newspapers-amid-telegraph-uncertainty
    • Apparently this forum  is " brimming with disgust and outrage" 🤣 I thought that was The  Telegraph 🤣
    • This is fascinating about how Lambeth are thought to be getting around the High Court ruling to allow the Brockwell events to proceed.....seems a risky legal strategy if true...and not sure I would want to be the council planning legal person who signs this off.....   https://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2025/05/protect-brockwell-park-fires-fresh-warning-as-lambeth-council-doubles-down-on-disputed-festival-plan/ Worth reading the whole piece for context but this section stands out: Despite this, Brockwell Live has submitted a new certificate application — one which they admit still covers more than 28 days, and is therefore not materially different from the version the court already struck down. It looks like instead of going to the Court of Appeal — where they’d surely lose — Brockwell Live is now asking Lambeth Planning to second-guess the High Court and decide whether the judge was right. Despite the clarity of the court’s decision, Lambeth appears to be doubling down, relying on a legal interpretation that’s already been rejected by a judge — and now asking its own planning department to endorse a position the judiciary has ruled unlawful.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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