Jump to content

Recommended Posts

alex_b Wrote:

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

> An 8:40 is really only useful if your office is right by London Bridge


BrandNewGuy Wrote:

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

> I know plenty of people who start work in town at 9.30


Trains are consistently busy from around 7am-9am. Whether 8:40 is more useful than 7:40 is entirely subjective and pretty much irrelevant. We used to have a good peak frequency, and now we don't.

fishbiscuits Wrote:

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


> Trains are consistently busy from around 7am-9am.

> Whether 8:40 is more useful than 7:40 is entirely

> subjective and pretty much irrelevant. We used to

> have a good peak frequency, and now we don't.


Yes agreed this is more the point - we'd like our pre-LB works frequency of service back, rather than whether we should have a 07.40 or an 08.40. Let's not settle, we used to have both, we should have both again!


I'm going to ask at the next 'meet the managers' thing at LB - whenever that is.

Okay I have found this... https://www.transformingrail.com/download-southern-metro-weekday-timetables


Whilst it looks like it's now in the consultation stage, from May 2018 the 'Wimbledon Loop' (ED to LB) service should revert to once every ten minutes.


Departing Mon-Fri from ED to LB at 07.02, 07.08, 07.23, 07.32, 07.38, 07.53, 08.02, 08.08, 08.23, 08.32 and 08.38 (and only taking 13 minutes into LB again)


And once every ten minutes Mon-Fri in the evening too between 16.44 and 18.44.


Hoo-blooming-rah!

JW Wrote:

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

> Okay I have found this...

> https://www.transformingrail.com/download-southern

> -metro-weekday-timetables

>

> Whilst it looks like it's now in the consultation

> stage, from May 2018 the 'Wimbledon Loop' (ED to

> LB) service should revert to once every ten

> minutes.

>

> Departing Mon-Fri from ED to LB at 07.02, 07.08,

> 07.23, 07.32, 07.38, 07.53, 08.02, 08.08, 08.23,

> 08.32 and 08.38 (and only taking 13 minutes into

> LB again)

>

> And once every ten minutes Mon-Fri in the evening

> too between 16.44 and 18.44.

>

> Hoo-blooming-rah!



Thank God!

> but a strange 15-17 minute gap both ways late in the peak (morning 08:38-08:53)


It's just the standard roughly equally-spaced half-hourly services from W. Croydon and Beckenham Junction, that would make for four 15 minute intervals, augmented until 09:32 by the half-hourly Thameslink Sutton-Wimbledon loop trains diverted from their usual route through Herne Hill. So you still get two fifteen minute gaps per peak hour, and four shorter ones.

I seem to remember a while ago there were comments that the London Overground service from Clapham Junction to Dalston would be increased to 6 TPH from the current 4 during 2018. Wondered if anyone had an info on this - or was it just an optimistic dream on my part?

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> I seem to remember a while ago there were comments

> that the London Overground service from Clapham

> Junction to Dalston would be increased to 6 TPH

> from the current 4 during 2018. Wondered if

> anyone had an info on this - or was it just an

> optimistic dream on my part?


It will happen eventually once new trains are transferred onto the Overground Watford line, which will give them extra units to operate on the ELL/SLL. There are also an extra 2 trains per hour planned for Crystal Palace as well.

According to this source from two years back, we can expect 6tph to Crystal Palace in 2018. 6tph to Clappie J from 2019. I believe this will happen seeing that the expected improvements scheduled for 2016 and 2017 were pretty much spot on.


https://anonw.com/2015/10/14/increased-frequencies-to-the-east-london-line/

  • 8 months later...

TFL have decided that although it would benefit the local community, there is ?no business case? for reopening Camberwell station : https://www.camberwellonline.co.uk/2018/09/tfl-no-business-case-to-reopen-camberwell-train-station/


It appears that TFL aren?t about serving the transport needs of local communities, but only about finding ways to divert public money into the pockets of developers in order to subsidise investment vehicles / luxury flats.

The station in Camberwell was a sop in return for supporting the Bakerloo line extension through OKR.


TFL have also confirmed no Bakerloo line extension stop at Bricklayers Arms - maybe the whole project is being scaled back ... notice at the end of the article "if funding is secured" - we're talking post Brexit.


https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/tfl-rules-out-bricklayers-arms-tube-station-in-bakerloo-line-extension-plans/

edcam Wrote:

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

> But it's not a sop if we're not getting it. Our

> transport gets worse and worse as they build more

> and more flats.


Agreed - Why should residents of Camberwell and Peckham now support the Bakerloo Line extension (obviously there are some reasons) - especially as it seems public funding is now needed to make up the cost (which will increase).

This is the mayor's problem- but since he is a politician then he will be chasing votes- so flats it is...and the well-off coming to London, who can afford the flats, will not be affected by any shade of politics and will virtue signal by voting Labour

TFL should be providing transport where there is demand for it. Not subsidising luxury flats (which invariably end up being sold off plan to overseas buyers). At the same time the council homes we've paid to be built are sold at less than market value and end up in the hands of private landlords (with taxpayers then having to also subsidise the increased rents). It's an absolute scam.


Why are our taxes are being poured into the pockets of private landlords and property developers? It infuriates me that they can say that reopening the station would 'serve the local community' but that there is 'no business case'? TFL are meant to be in the business of serving London's 'local communities'. They're funded by our taxes, in order to provide transport infrastructure, not to act as an arm of Galliard FFS.

If this isn't what happen at OKR and Battersea (both of which are being facilitated by a massive public investment from TFL / the taxpayer) - I will eat my hat:

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/qkq4bx/every-flat-in-a-new-south-london-development-has-been-sold-to-foreign-investors

  • 3 weeks later...

Earlier in this thread (January), it was mentioned that there would more trains on the crystal palace- Dalston junction overground line from 2018, and more on the Clapham junction- Dalston junction line in 2019... Anyone know if this is still happening? Guess not as no direct mention of it here

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/london-overground/improving-london-overground#on-this-page-0

  • 3 months later...

A Victoria line extension would be ace!!


I heard they wanted to do that a few years ago but all the locals complained.... I don't know which 'locals' though because no one ever asked me or anyone i know here!! We are all for it!!


If you get this started i'd totally be up for helping.

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 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.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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