Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree Sue, it is visual noise/pollution, whatever you want to call it - there's no getting away from the fact those blue bins are the most disgusting artificial colour EVER and do ruin the landscape.


They are the bin equivalent of stone cladding. Couldn't we at least have had a muted grey bin?

I hate these new bins they completely change the whole greeny feel of dulwich and they are impossible to hide. They had no consideration what so ever as to what these bins would do to the whole look and feel of the area. i feel embarrassed when our friends from outside london come to visit and see our bright blue bin sticking out like a sore thumb in our front garden. Shame on Southwark council.

DaveR Wrote:

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

> "Yes it is. I have a psychology degree which

> included clinical psychology, and have done

> postgraduate research in psychology."

>

> Well done you. Have you read the research you

> posted a link to? Not just the abstract, but the

> methodology and findings? In your expert opinion

> does it support your assertion that bright blue

> bins are capable of impacting negatively on the

> mental health of ED residents to the same extent

> as constant loud music? Do you want to talk me

> through how you came to that conclusion? While

> you're at it, can you explain why, as has already

> been pointed out, you came out with this

> nonsense:

>

> "There are statistics indicating the relationship

> between the visual environment and crime, for

> example the New York zero tolerance of graffiti

> and litter."

>

> If you're going to make this kind of statement:

>

> "you'd be better advised not to make statements

> about things you clearly know nothing about"

>

> you'd better be on very firm ground. And it also

> puts you in a very poor position to complain about

> unpleasantness.

>

> If you don't like the look of the blue bins, just

> say so. Trying to invest your opinion with

> quasi-scientific authority plus showing us your

> certificates just ain't very persuasive.

>

> ETA - I have a whole load of experience of crime

> and disorder, much of it involving people with

> mental health problems, but it has zero relevance

> to my opinion on blue bins.


xxxxxxx


You are of course completely right on every count, and I bow to your far greater knowledge, experience and good humour :)

There is an irony to the fact that the new vivid blue bins are made out of almost indestructable plastic - which will last tens of lifetimes and never need replacing - so no chance that in our, or our children's, or our children's children's lives will there be any economic need to replace them with something less intrusive. The thoughtless decision of a local aparatchik has saddled us indefinitely with these eyesores. All in the name of the environment!

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> Oh come on - they'll only have a half-life of 6000

> years. By then almost everything will be made out

> of bright blue plastic anyway - even the trees.


xxxxxxx


Yeh, it all reminds me of that Joni Mitchell line "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot".


They paved paradise

And put up a parking lot

With a pink hotel, a boutique

And a swinging hot spot

Don't it always seem to go

That you don't know what you've got

?Til it's gone

They paved paradise

And put up a parking lot


They took all the trees

And put them in a tree museum

Then they charged the people

A dollar and a half just to see 'em

Don't it always seem to go,

That you don't know what you've got

?Til it's gone

They paved paradise

And put up a parking lot


:-S

I have just walked down Marmora Road and there are so many bins on the pavements, I personally find it depressing, it is relevant to where we live, you can be both concerned about this as well as the appalling state some people live in both this country as well as Africa, some people have worked bloody hard to get out of some awful area to live here and we dont deserve to have our environment ruined, all these bins on our pavements are extremely unsightly. surely they are not all necessarry, they are litter on the pavements and made of plastic which is environmentally bad. I hate the blue colour too, a bad decision, at least the brown and green blended in before. It used to bug me before when residents did not put their bins back after emptying and leave them on the pavement, now, there is not enough space in people's gardens to put them back even if they wanted.

Evie, I suggest you email the councillor whose email address is given in the first post on this thread.


At least he will be in no doubt what people think about his rubbish decision re the colour, even if it's too late to do much about it now.


ETA: And it might make you feel better!

HGi Sue

I am going to do that, I hope they will do something about it at least have less of them if nothing can be done about the colour, I personally would like the colour changed to something more acceptable that will blend in. This may seem ridiculous to some, but I feel this could be the start of the decline of our area. The street looks like a dumping ground now. It really isn't fair on those who have spent time, effort and money to improve their properties and help to improve the area.

Evie Wrote:

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

> HGi Sue

> I am going to do that, I hope they will do

> something about it at least have less of them if

> nothing can be done about the colour, I personally

> would like the colour changed to something more

> acceptable that will blend in. This may seem

> ridiculous to some, but I feel this could be the

> start of the decline of our area. The street looks

> like a dumping ground now. It really isn't fair

> on those who have spent time, effort and money to

> improve their properties and help to improve the

> area.


xxxxxx


I don't think, in the current financial climate, that the council, however stupid they have been in their colour choice, will replace thousands of bins, particularly as they are not bio-degradable.


I think we're stuck with it.


All I managed to wring out of them was a promise to use a more appropriate shade of blue in the future, but since every house has already got one of the bright blue ones, I can't see that making much difference.


You do know you can have a box or continue to use your existing dark blue box, rather than having a wheelie bin?

I did not think for one minute they would change them, I just feel so angry about it. The bins not being bio degradable I think is part of the problem, not ours but certainly some future generations, why are they trying to phase out plastic bags when they are making so many other BIG things out of plastic? what was wrong with bins being made out of metal as before? they can be recycled and made into other things when no longer needed. I will be continuing with the blue box, do you know who I contact to get rid of the large blue bin? I really do not have that much waste, I am not a great fan of convenience or over packaged food.


Thanks

Evie

Evie Wrote:

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

> I did not think for one minute they would change

> them, I just feel so angry about it. The bins not

> being bio degradable I think is part of the

> problem, not ours but certainly some future

> generations, why are they trying to phase out

> plastic bags when they are making so many other

> BIG things out of plastic? what was wrong with

> bins being made out of metal as before? they can

> be recycled and made into other things when no

> longer needed. I will be continuing with the blue

> box, do you know who I contact to get rid of the

> large blue bin? I really do not have that much

> waste, I am not a great fan of convenience or over

> packaged food.

>

> Thanks

> Evie


xxxxxxx


You can phone the recycling department on 020 7525 2000.


You will have to wait for ages going through various menus (tip - it's 2 then 2, you don't have to wait till the end before hitting the 2) and then for ages more while they drone on and on before telling you to hold on if you need to speak to somebody.


I've been waiting for a new smaller green bin for over a month.


I phoned today to find out where it was. The first person I spoke to cut me off, so then I had to go through the whole process again. (6)


Eventually spoke to somebody else, and all they could do was reorder it. So another few weeks (6)

"This may seem ridiculous to some, but I feel this could be the start of the decline of our area"


It certainly seems ridiculous to me.


"The bins not being bio degradable I think is part of the problem"


If the bins bio-degraded all the rubbish would end up on the floor, which would be even worse, no?

Hi Dave.


I was right then, I knew it would seem ridiculous to some,


Yes if the bins were biodegradeable the rubbish would be all over the floor in maybe 10 years, or however long it takes biodegradable stuff to break down.


In the meantime maybe someone clever could come up with a solution, or maybe someone not so clever can remove all the excess bins and someone at the council can think of the consequences of making bad decisions that affect our environment and not bloody well do it again

It's not ideal and the streets look messy but here are some ideas:


- sharing bins? I can't believe that every household needs a big blue bin each and a big green one - especially 1 or 2 adult households. We barely produce a bin bag full of non recyclable rubbish Is there any posisbility the council could coordinate this?

- a big problem seems to be people leaving bins on the street or not having them on their property even when there is room

- bin covers #1

- bin covers #2

- you don't really need the big brown bin and the small one isn't really obstrusive

bawdy-nan Wrote:

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

> It's not ideal and the streets look messy but here

> are some ideas:

>

> - sharing bins? I can't believe that every

> household needs a big blue bin each and a big

> green one - especially 1 or 2 adult households. We

> barely produce a bin bag full of non recyclable

> rubbish Is there any posisbility the council could

> coordinate this?

> - a big problem seems to be people leaving bins on

> the street or not having them on their property

> even when there is room

> - bin covers #1

> - bin covers #2

> - you don't really need the big brown bin and the

> small one isn't really obstrusive



sharing bins?


Although the Council seem to deny that Micro Chips will be fitted to bins to weigh contents and

charge each household.


I can see this happening in the future.


sharing bins? would then not be possible.


It's all part of the 'Big Plan'


Fox.

Maybe people should be fined for leaving their bins on the pavement, it would be difficult to implement but it may just be an incentive to make people put their bins back or make space for them, although I can see the problems already as some people just don't have the space. It's a difficult one.

Maybe people should be fined


Oh great - another revenue stream for the council - great ploy - force everyone to have more bins than they have space for, then fine them. Some of us need the big bins (my blue bin was overflowing by the time it was collected (and that was on time)) - I have the space off street, but many people don't.


Maybe the councillors who had this pig stupid idea should be fined for every eyesore bin left out there - but fine the victims, not the criminals, that's they way to do it.

Evie Wrote:

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

> Maybe people should be fined for leaving their

> bins on the pavement


xxxxxx


I have for years been labouring under the impression that the bin people were supposed to replace the bins where they found them, is this wrong?


I had a bin recess built outside my terraced house, but they still leave the bin on the pavement (or worse, blocking the path to my front door) and just chuck the recycling boxes all over my plants.

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...