Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Where in Melbourne Grove was this, Countrlass22? The acoustics around here tend to amplify sound in such a weird way that I normally hear everything at my end (towards Lordship), but I didn't hear it last night.


It looked like there was party near me last night, but the back garden of the relevant house would have echoed across the nearby housing estate into the direction of the G&Ts (which is where I think you live?). Otherwise there could have been another one further down Melbourne towards East Dulwich Grove?


Residents in this area need to be extra considerate after 11pm, because they don't realise how the sound tends to bounce around at night.

I'd agree - if it was a regular thing, then that's different.


Personally, I would prefer our neighbours didn't do karaoke when they're drunk but they are definately having fun and I would much rather that than hearing people argue.


Having said that, the most irritated I've been is when they played the recent royal wedding at 500 decibels so they could hear it in the garden. Completely spoiled my morning/ afternoon plans and I ended up going out, rather than having to put up with it.


I hope you know who you are and don't do it again.

Countrlass22 Wrote:

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

> Not one off been going on long time..

> First time able report..

>

>

> ADMIN

> Close thread abuse not tolerated on here


Certainly isn't, but where precisely is it on this thread? One mildly sarcastic (if somewhat silly) comment?

singalto Wrote:

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

> Kibris that is a ridiculous thing to say. An all

> night party is not acceptable.



may I point out the OP posted at 12.10am.....not 5am.

At midnight I would hardly label it an 'all night party'

I think until 1am at the weekend one should be a bit more forgiving-and I actually work most weekends but despite that would never dream of complaining about noise from a neighbours party unless it carried on until well into the early hours.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

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

> Give her a break, the poor thing's had no sleep!

>

> The fact the noise team took action makes me feel

> she wasn't being unreasonable.


I'm sure she may not have been and I get as annoyed at selfishly loud/late parties as the next middle-aged man who likes to go to bed around eleven - I also think Kibris' comment was rather stupid and of a part with his/her general sneery contributions to this forum. However, to claim "abuse" and ask admin to close the thread down because someone makes a silly comment is ridiculous, sleep deprived or not.

It's totally unreasonable to have an all night party in a quiet residential street without speaking to your neighbours in advance. The fact that the noise team shut it down also speaks volumes (excuse the pun).


I think the OP was lucky that it was midnight and not later on in the night as (ironically) the noise team close up shop much after that.

Hi - I just wanted to make a few clarifications to this message thread.


Firstly, Mea culpa - it was my 40th birthday party on Sat night on Melbourne Grove - but almost everything the OP writes above is incorrect. Secondly, it clearly did disturb the OP for which I apologise.


1. This was not an all night party. It started at 8Pm with the main party over by 1:30 and the last guests left about 2:15 when we switched off the music - clearly late enough to disturb people, again for any disturbance I am sorry - but not an all nighter.


2. Neither Southwark noise nor any other officials or authorities came round and we had no direct complaints.


3. We contacted all the neighbours we thought would be disturbed beforehand and took round bottles of wine. But in fact, it is a very close community on MG and most of our neighbours were at our party anyway!


4. This was a one off for a special occasion - we have lived in the house for over 8 years and not had a party before.


Again, I apologise to anyone that was disturbed but this was a special one off, and we thought we had taken steps to

Minimise noise and be as considerate as possible - a bit of local tolerance would be nice on some occasions instead of always thinking the worst - this wasn?t a bunch of irresponsible teenagers falling out onto the street at all hours - our guests left in a considerate manner.

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'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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