Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've just flicked through latest issue of Living Etc mag which I picked up today and low and behold...whole page

at back of magazine titled 'London Neighbourhood, East Dulwich SE22'!!!


How cool is that?

Lovely shops listed, very positive, bound to be a boost for the area!


I Love East Dulwich!

Couture xx

I think I prefered ED when it was undiscovered and shops and pubs catered for local people.


It was a quiet residential area and locals gathered in their 'Local' Pub for a chat and find out latest gossip.


If you walk down Lordship Lane late on a Fri/Sat night it is like being in Malia / Ibiza.

It is crazy.


Pubs I used to use are now filled with 'Tourists' and clientel seem to change on a weekly basis.

dont know where they all come for, but hardly ever see the same faces week by week.


Shops now selling non essensials. have no value to the local community.


ED cannot cope with this huge influx of people and has now lost all it's character.


couture said..

Positive interest = more customers = more trade = business expansion = increased employment


Yes. more traffic/cars/congestion/pollution/people/rubbish/noise/vandalism/crime/robbery/begging.


Fox.

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> I think I prefered ED when it was undiscovered and

> shops and pubs catered for local people.


So you preferred it when it was the Royston Vasey of SE London?


The more publicity the area gets and the more people it brings in, and therefore the more people who can sustain cool shops, bars and restaurants, the better it is IMHO.

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> I think I prefered ED when it was undiscovered and

> shops and pubs catered for local people.

>

> It was a quiet residential area and locals

> gathered in their 'Local' Pub for a chat and find

> out latest gossip.

>

> If you walk down Lordship Lane late on a Fri/Sat

> night it is like being in Malia / Ibiza.

> It is crazy.

>

> Pubs I used to use are now filled with 'Tourists'

> and clientel seem to change on a weekly basis.

> dont know where they all come for, but hardly ever

> see the same faces week by week.

>

> Shops now selling non essensials. have no value to

> the local community.

>

> ED cannot cope with this huge influx of people and

> has now lost all it's character.

>

> couture said..

> Positive interest = more customers = more trade =

> business expansion = increased employment

>

> Yes. more

> traffic/cars/congestion/pollution/people/rubbish/n

> oise/vandalism/crime/robbery/begging.

>

> Fox.



It does seem from your recent posts that you aren?t too happy living in ED anymore Fox - it?s a shame when somewhere you call home changes and it loses its appeal for you. I?m new to the area (I?m probably one of the tourists you mention as I try places out) and personally I love it. It seems to have a great mix of peace and quiet but with a great variety of shops, cafes, pubs and restaurants. It also seems to have a sense of community that I really wasn?t expecting moving to London.


LL is not really like Mali/Ibiza. There's loads of other places in London that are far closer to the party scene you get in holiday resorts.

cool shops, bars and restaurants,???


Where are they then...???


You mean the Arty Farty craft shops. The Over priced rowdy 'Pubs'? bars. The over priced Restaurants.


The ones that make a fortune and pay their staff less than the minimum wage.. (relying on Tips)


Do nothing for the community..


There is nothing cool about people urinating in your front garden or being sick on your doorstep.


I speak to people in the bars of ED. They seem to come to ED to eat and drink but do not live here.

A couple I spoke to said they came from Putney cab fare ?20.00 and ?30.00 for a late night cab home.


Are there no decent Pubs/Bars in Putney ???

I do really wonder why you live here if that's what you now think of your local area?! I'm sure it was different 10+ years ago. I moved here about a year ago and love the place, but then the "overpriced and rowdy" pubs, "overpriced" restaurants and "arty farty" craft shops are exactly why I did. I think the same would go for most other recent arrivals to the area - and I know plenty of people who've lived here for years who like the way it has changed into the place it is now.


This is London - things change. Sometimes areas change and you feel priced out or feel like it's not your sort of place anymore. I'm sorry if that's how you feel, but please don't rain on the parade of anyone who likes to be positive about the area that they live in.

Fox did I say cool? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't - I'm not cool enough to know!


Places to drink - I like the mix, from old fashioned ?boozers? like The Castle to Wine Bars such as Green and Blue. Food wise - French, Italian, Turkish, Indian, nice roasts..not been disappointed so far. Shops - Sainsbury, Co-Op Iceland, the delis and butcher cover off my needs food wise. Clothes shops, the market, bookshops and home stuff allow enough browsing opportunities and the occasional purchase. Buying a birthday present for a 1 year old at the weekend, spoilt for choice! And anyway central London is 20 minutes away should that not be enough for you.


I used to live on a thoroughfare between the ?trendy? part of town and the local chavy nightclub and taxi rank, had years of people urinating on the front door and being sick on my doorstep. If you live on LL maybe you get this, on the side streets is this really problem? I?ve not noticed it.


I really like it in ED.

Im With, AlexC & PipD, when i moved to London most of my Devon friends were mortified for me. To them anywhere in London is dangerous riot filled, expensive, dirty and generally undesirable. I can show them that and enlighten them a little. I think there are small areas of wasteland inhabited by intransigent people; with respect Dulwich Fox may be happier on the Isle of Sheppey. The trouble is will they be happy with incomers from Dulwich.

AlexC Wrote:

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

> I do really wonder why you live here if that's

> what you now think of your local area?! I'm sure

> it was different 10+ years ago. I moved here about

> a year ago and love the place, but then the

> "overpriced and rowdy" pubs, "overpriced"

> restaurants and "arty farty" craft shops are

> exactly why I did. I think the same would go for

> most other recent arrivals to the area - and I

> know plenty of people who've lived here for years

> who like the way it has changed into the place it

> is now.

>

> This is London - things change. Sometimes areas

> change and you feel priced out or feel like it's

> not your sort of place anymore. I'm sorry if

> that's how you feel, but please don't rain on the

> parade of anyone who likes to be positive about

> the area that they live in.



I've lived here all my life. Well here and Peckham.

I have no intention of moving out for a few louts and yuppies?? or whst ever they are called now..


It is a very English thing to move to an area and try to change it.


Like the Brits abroard syndrone.. The people who went to live in Spain but hated the Spanish, refused to

learn Spanish and turned a little bit of Spain into a little bit of England.


Come and live in ED. But don't try and change it, and learn the language so to speak.


Fox.

Fox, it's not an English thing to want to move to an area and try and change it. It's just a process that happens in urban areas, i.e. (this)! I fail to see how ED getting some nice shops and resteraunts is some how compareable to the Costas?!


So, if you've no intention of moving out why put down the area you live in? It is what it is. If the place was getting filled with chain stores, all the independent places were closing and it was losing it's character I'd be with you but that's not the case.


If you get people throwing up in your front garden, you have my sympathies. That must be very unpleasant, but other than that I fail to see what your problem is exactly?

"It is a very English thing to move to an area and try to change it.


Like the Brits abroard syndrone.. The people who went to live in Spain but hated the Spanish, refused to

learn Spanish and turned a little bit of Spain into a little bit of England.


Come and live in ED. But don't try and change it, and learn the language so to speak"


East Dulwich has been around roughly since the 1870s and I guess it's changed quite a bit since then. It's natural to think of your area as having always been how it was when you were growing up, but it just aint so, particularly not in inner London during the last 30 years. Whether you like it or not, most of the people shopping in the arty farty shops and drinking in the overpriced bars are part of the local community, even if they haven't been around for as long as you.

Well DulwichFox, whether you like it or not, yuppies like me are part of this community and as I see EDF as an extension to that community, it'd be nice if you could not shoot down anyone who is positive about the community that they live in.


Now, I'm off to start a thread about getting a Watirose branch on LL... ;-)

I think you're the first person I've ever encountered who identifies themself as a yuppie!


While I don't share DF's overtly negative opinion of the gentrification of ED, I do have reservations. I don't like the idea of people moving here and hoping/trying to change it, and I certainly don't like the suggestion that people should move away if they don't like what the area has become.

Hmm, I should have put that in inverted commas! Just playing along to the boring old stereotype mentioned above! ;-)


Do individal people really try to change an area (unless they are opening some kind of business)? I think it's a lot more of a gradual process than that. A new business may attract more people, which in turn attracts more businesses of a certain type, which in turn attracts more people who like that sort of thing etc..

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> I think you're the first person I've ever

> encountered who identifies themself as a yuppie!

>

> While I don't share DF's overtly negative opinion

> of the gentrification of ED, I do have

> reservations. I don't like the idea of people

> moving here and hoping/trying to change it, and I

> certainly don't like the suggestion that people

> should move away if they don't like what the area

> has become.


I don't think anyone has suggested either Jeremy. Places change over time, partly because new people move in and create markets for new things (i.e. they themsleves are not forcing a change). No one has said Fox should leave, just can't quite understand why anyone would live somewhere if they didn't like it and/or it was making them miserable.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> I wasn't really talking about individual people,

> literally changing the area singlehandedly. More

> the kind of mentality behind posts like "why can't

> we replace Iceland with a Waitrose", or "why can't

> we knock down the ugly flats on ... road".


Agree, you shouldn't demand. If there is a need it will happen. Don't see anything wrong with promoting/advertising the need, but you shouldn't do that by putting down what is already there (unless it's not being used.

It's a home style magazine I think Alan. For people who have a feature wall in their bedroom, white floorboards and weird vases....


Whilst the Fox is going a little too far, I agree with him on a few points. Especially going out Fri/Sat nights. The bar scene's changed a lot in the last 5 years and the Lane has become a destination for less well endowed areas like Beckenham or Forest Hill. I used to like the more local, less frantic Friday nights when you could eat in a bar without people dancing around you. Who eats in the Bishop after 8pm on a Friday any more?


BUT...there is still a reassuring spread of other valuable business types used by the local community on a daily basis, like the joiner who's making me a great door, Walsh Glazing (respect to you, the good value Irish glass fitting massive) and the mighty East Dulwich DIY. I did like it back then but perhaps that was my honeymoon period.

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...