Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Welcome to the area, as a toast rack resident I feel your pain.


The traffic is mildly worse at the moment than usual due to the closure of camberwell grove. Part of the current problem too is that due to the lack of parking restrictions anyone can park here and the whole area functions as a free for all for commuters using local stations and bus routes.


Thankfully a consultation was held last autumn to get a CPZ, and it looks like there has been a positive reaction. If a CPZ does come in over the summer, then expect traffic to drop considerably as the commuters find other streets to clog up, and Cambwerwell Grove reopens.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> The CPZ won't calm traffic, it may well have the

> opposite effect.

> Camberwell Grove reopening will improve things.



Genuinely curious - why do you think reducing the number of vehicles on the streets by about 60%, and removing all the daily commuters fighting for spaces make it busier for traffic?

Bopster Wrote:

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

> Hi

>

> I've recently moved to Lyndhurst Grove. There's a

> lot more traffic than I thought. Is this because

> the bridge on Camberwell Grove is closed or is it

> always like this. Seems like it gets used as a bit

> of a rat run.

>

> Cheers


Camberwell Grove bridge closure is indeed the main issue. Should be a noticeable improvement when it finally reopens.

rahrah - I did enjoy that ,thanks .

Posting lyrics for those like me who can't hear


"59 Lyndhurst Grove"


There's a picture by his first wife on the wall

Stripped floor-boards in the kitchen and the hall

A stain from last week's party on the stairs

No one knows who made it or how it ever got there

They were dancing with children round their legs

Talking business, books and records, art and sex

All things being considered you'd call it a success

You wore your black dress oh-oh oh-oh...

He's an architect and such a lovely guy

and he'll stay with you until the day you die

And he'll give you everything you could desire

Oh well almost everything everything that he can buy

So you sometimes go out in the afternoon

Spend an hour with your lover in his bedroom hear old women

rolling trolleys down the road

Back to Lyndhurst Grove Lyndhurst Grove Oh.

As for the traffic - IMO it's busy because it's a road used to get from A to B ( aka a "rat run " ) in a busy metropolitan city .


Cars jostling to park may increase this factor at key times but won't decrease the traffic driving from A to B .Of which there are many .All day .

Bopster - we are also on Lyndhurst Grove. The biggest problem on the road is the section between Talfourd Rd and Denman Rd where there is only space for one car, so you frequently get queues at each end with cars waiting to go up and down. Add to this impatient drivers moving through the section at the same time with resultant, often heated, arguments, it can be very noisy and quite painful! This has always been a problem, but the volume of traffic since Camberwell Grove closed has definitely increased and made the whole situation worse. There is discussion of CPZ/parking on one side only in this section which will make the flow of traffic much better, but the opening of Camberwell Grove will likely make the biggest difference.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> That stretch is definitely a problem .Wouldn't

> double yellow lines on one side be as effective as

> a CPZ ?



Southwark estimate that CPZs drop car use by about 60%. Also some yellow lines are coming in with the proposed CPZ.

Right .Um ,I'm sure this is simplistic but I can't help thinking this


"Commuter" car tries to park outside a resident's house

a) resident of Lyndhurst Grove parked there already

b) resident's car absent and space available for "commuter" .


No harm done ?



Resident returns from work/errand - "commuter " car taking up parking space . Answer = CPZ ,resident pays money and "commuter" prevented from parking ,space remains empty .

Bit of a waste .

Or doesn't remain empty because Residents Parking Permits exceeds number of residents'cars .

Mmm - why have a CPZ with Resident Parking ?

The problem is that there are less residents with cars than spaces, but the problem in this area is the following:


Heavy useage from commuters who fill up the road from 6am onwards, and spaces rarely become available before 7pm - therefore the residents have nowhere to go on their return.


Heavy 'out of hours' use by places like Kings College Hospital - who have increased their parking charges meaning that staff park for free locally, but this increases 'out of hours' pressure even during the weekends. Since recent changes there has been a near total loss of 'spare spaces' during the weekend where even a few years ago there was space.


Local residents living in CPZ areas parking their cars long term for free rather than pay for a CPZ, thus denying spaces long term.


Finally lots of people who need to use cars need to do so during the day - there are no spaces left when they return from their daily car use and I've heard of people spend an hour looking for a space. There are serious issues for elderly, disabled and parents which are causing major quality of life issues for them. A CPZ makes a vast and life chaniging difference for them.

Has there been any research into consumer satisfaction with existing RP schemes I wonder ?


I've heard it's often not the holy grail envisioned by many but maybe this is untrue .


What is true I fear is that such schemes result in other areas suffering ,that the total nos of parking spaces is reduced slightly ,that living near major transport/places of employment/schools/hospital does indeed cause pressure on car parkingetc .


" less residents with cars than spaces" - that is unusual .I wonder if the proximity of 2 railway stations and numerous bus routes has encouraged residents to avoid car ownership "

and rahrah's right I think .


If commuter vehicles looking for parking spaces are removed and there are fewer vehicle movements the road will become clearer of traffic . Initially .But the fact that it's less clogged up will make it more attractive to people driving through and using it as a route to get from A to B . So it won't stay that way .

jimlad48 Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The CPZ won't calm traffic, it may well have

> the

> > opposite effect.

> > Camberwell Grove reopening will improve things.

>

>

> Genuinely curious - why do you think reducing the

> number of vehicles on the streets by about 60%,

> and removing all the daily commuters fighting for

> spaces make it busier for traffic?


Because fewer parked vehicles generally means higher average speeds and more 'rat running'.

Bopster Wrote:

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

> It really is quite busy. Thankfully I have a six

> month break clause in my lease. Won't be staying

> if it's like this.

>

> Would it be worth seeing if there's any chance of

> getting the road closed/filtered to through

> traffic


I think you've answered a question?

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...