Jump to content

Recommended Posts

..why are there so many of our ugly bins stored outside gardens and on the pavement? Some householders are simply choosing not to make room for them and the result is an eyesore. If you have a bin that can be housed in your property, please do so. Young children, parents and assorted pets are having to fight for space, some of them going into the road, which can get pretty busy during the school run hours.

Could not agree more, same applies to Copleston - special mention for the houses that have done up their front gardens nicely and clearly don't want to mess them up so leave the bins on the street permanently. Recently had to move half a dozen bins out of the way so an elderly lady using a powered wheelchair could get down the pavement without having to retrace her tracks by a hundred yards or risk bumping off the kerb into the road. Very selfish behavior!


Kudos to the refuse collectors I must say; we put our bins out the morning of collection, nine times out of ten they've been returned to our storage area by the time I go out to bring them in - so the binmen are doing their part, we should too!

Binmen (I have yet to see a female binperson) do not always put them back. In and around Goodrich, they are nearly always left on the pavement. Perhaps certain routes are busier and the time allotted is not enough or perhaps they simply CBA.
Ashbourne Grove residents use them to protect parking spaces and then leave them on the street which is very unneighbourly and a huge hazard as people end up walking in the road. The bin men we have are very good at putting them back on the correct property.

agree ... very selfish behaviour (and against planning regs) to develop a front garden without leaving space for bins, with the intention of permanently keeping them on the pavement.


Anyone who's ever tried to navigate the pavement with a buggy (especially double or when busy) will know what I mean.


If they've been deliberately left out on the pavement (as opposed to not been returned following bin day), and are blocking the way, I suggest moving them onto the entrance to the owner's front garden.

I don't particularly understand the angst about bins on pavements. I have mobility issues that aren't as obvious to the casual observer, but have more problems with parents with buggies/prams trying to force right of way than I do navigating bins. The only exception is when they are not left flush with the fence, but that's usually the binmen rather than owners.

P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

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

> I don't particularly understand the angst about

> bins on pavements. I have mobility issues that

> aren't as obvious to the casual observer, but have

> more problems with parents with buggies/prams

> trying to force right of way than I do navigating

> bins. The only exception is when they are not

> left flush with the fence, but that's usually the

> binmen rather than owners.


I think if you had to use a wheelchair you'd soon understand - as noted above, there are many roads where there simply isn't space for a chair to get through even if the bins are flat against the wall - Bellenden Road is particularly bad in this respect. But even for the fully able bodied they're a pain in the arse, continually having to stop to let others through as there's only room for people to pass in single file. Also they uglify the streetscape, all because people can't be bothered to spend ten seconds getting them in.

I have never understood why bins are used to save parking spaces, I know parking is now premium in East Dulwich, and I am forever circulating round the roads looking for a space. However if I saw a bin being left on the road deliberately for parking, then you may see me move it and use the space myself.

There are some lovely storage containers you can put in the front garden space, iv seen them on the East Dulwich Rd, where the pavements are very narrow.

My gripe is that they are likely to cause obstruction which, on certain roads at certain times, could make an accident more likely to happen. I also think they look really ugly and could encourage tipping and littering. (One of the brown bins, meant for garden waste, is full of any old rubbish and it has no lid.) Again, if this is you - please put the bin back in the yard/garden!
It's absurd that more or less every household in ED has a full size brown wheelie bin, especially as so many gardens are tiny and can't possibly yield a full bin's worth of garden waste every week. They are such an eyesore especially on the streets where there is no choice but to store bins on the pavement.
So, we're mainly agreed that bins on the pavement with no good reason is a bad thing. The only way forward is to put roll them back over the threshold (though I have sent Cllr Barber a link to this thread) and/or ask your neighbours to keep them in the right place.

If I used a wheelchair I might, Ren, but I doubt that most of the people complaining on EDF are, hand on heart, thinking of wheelchair users. They are thinking of prams, aesthetics, notions of what constitutes proper social rules and, on one occasion I've seen, a completely unsubstantiated claim that bins out causes crime.


If the good EDFers are going to start putting disabled people foremost, they may want to also reflect how difficult it can be when you are mobility restricted to get wheelie bins back in. I have had rabid neighbours get in a lather because it often takes me more than a day to get them all in, on the strength only that they object to things being "ugly".

P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

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

> If I used a wheelchair I might, Ren, but I doubt

> that most of the people complaining on EDF are,

> hand on heart, thinking of wheelchair users. They

> are thinking of prams, aesthetics, notions of what

> constitutes proper social rules and, on one

> occasion I've seen, a completely unsubstantiated

> claim that bins out causes crime.

>

> If the good EDFers are going to start putting

> disabled people foremost, they may want to also

> reflect how difficult it can be when you are

> mobility restricted to get wheelie bins back in.

> I have had rabid neighbours get in a lather

> because it often takes me more than a day to get

> them all in, on the strength only that they object

> to things being "ugly".


Well...if they're thinking of prams and aesthetics I'd say both of those are justified complaints really. If they're claiming bins cause crime then they're talking rubbish (ho ho). If your neighbours complain about your bins being out without offering to lend you a hand as needed then they should be deposited in them! If the bin men forget to put ours back I usually put our neighbours' back as well, just to be neighbourly...


It is a serious point about wheelchairs though, as above, I have had to shift them to help wheelchair users get through, more than once.

What I find so ridiculous and ironic is that in streets in East Dulwich that are lined with bins that haven't been taken back into their gardens/yards there is still litter! People have an endless supply of bins to choose from and they still drop litter on the pavement.

drewd Wrote:

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

> What I find so ridiculous and ironic is that in

> streets in East Dulwich that are lined with bins

> that haven't been taken back into their

> gardens/yards there is still litter! People have

> an endless supply of bins to choose from and they

> still drop litter on the pavement.

You call them 'people'...very generous of you

There is nothing wrong in being concerned about the ugliness of one's environment. I am bothered by the bins because they are ugly and also because they cause micro-annoyances, like having to walk in the road in an area of busy footfall, and because they attract other litter (with folk stacking stuff around them thinking they are not littering because they have put their trash near rather than in a bin). Other people's anti-socialness and selfishness is also annoying and should be challenged. I get that it is not a huge deal in the scheme of things but that shouldn't stop people from trying to make micro-improvements to their immediate environment.

As much as I wish you were my neighbuur instead Ren, you're missing my point. You cited the wheelchair users' plight - I pointed out that's nothing to do with why people complain about this kind of thing for the most part.


Nigello, I appreciate the accumulation of small grievances can add up in modern society. I do think people lose perspective with these things though - and clearly in my case to the extent that some people get whipped up by threads like this, and take it as support that their sense of aesthetics are worth abusing a disabled person over.


C'mon guys. This curtain-twitchy stuff does not help our community.

I?m genuinely curious when we as a nation lost the the pride in our surroundings and houses that it has got to the point where someone who thinks having wheely bins all over the place/ general detritus on the street is accused of being petty and trivial - it is not modern society to be a slob. Go to many other countries who clearly are also part of a modern society and leaving bins or rubbish in front of your house is either totally unacceptable or against the law


You can?t deny that if all the streets had wheely bins moved back to their correct places the streets would look better and walking down them would be more pleasant. Maybe it might make London which is a busy and crowded place just a little bit nicer to live in if we all had some form of collective respect instead people being accused of NIMBYISM






P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

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

> As much as I wish you were my neighbuur instead

> Ren, you're missing my point. You cited the

> wheelchair users' plight - I pointed out that's

> nothing to do with why people complain about this

> kind of thing for the most part.

>

> Nigello, I appreciate the accumulation of small

> grievances can add up in modern society. I do

> think people lose perspective with these things

> though - and clearly in my case to the extent that

> some people get whipped up by threads like this,

> and take it as support that their sense of

> aesthetics are worth abusing a disabled person

> over.

>

> C'mon guys. This curtain-twitchy stuff does not

> help our community.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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