Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yet again, for about the zillionth time, we have Thames Water apparently digging up Ulverscroft Road.


At 10.30 on Saturday night.


Anybody know what's going on, and why they didn't sort the problem the many times they have dug up the same bit of road before?


:(


ETA: Just been to ask them.


"It's a hundred year old main."


Yes so why don't you replace it or do a repair which lasts more than a few weeks? Wouldn't that be more cost effective than keep having to send out people every few weeks?


"Yes I agree with you etc etc etc and you should have your water back by the morning".


I just hope the poor expletive deleted who keeps getting his cellar flooded, a few doors down from me, is going to claim enormous amounts of compensation.


Are Thames Water privatised? Disgraceful.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/210910-thames-water/
Share on other sites

Underhook Wrote:

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

> If, every time there was a leak reported, TW

> closed off the street in question in order to dig

> up the road and replace the entire pipe, this

> would be hugely expensive and time consuming. It

> isn?t really in anyone?s interest to do this



I'm talking about a situation where the same bit of road is constantly being dug up because a resident's cellar is being flooded.


I'm not talking about a number of unrelated leaks.

  • Administrator

"Where will this end?!"


That's a bit dramatic isn't it? It's a change from: "Thames Water" to "Thames Water (digging up Ulverscroft Road)"


We've done it for years, heck we even say in the terms " We also reserve the right to edit ... postings ... usually the title to make it more relevant".


Sorry if you don't like it and less people look at your post but it does help other forum users, and that is what is important to the moderators.

You may have done it for years, but I (and others) have noticed that it appears to have been done a lot more frequently of late!


But the thing is, it seems a bit random which headings are edited to make them more relevant and which aren't.


As your terms were last updated in May of this year, I have no idea how long they may have included the part about editing the title!


Anyway, glad if it helps people, of course. It never crossed my mind it would affect who read the post!

  • Administrator

Just to answer those quickly,

Not done it any more frequently recently, if anything less

You thought a heading in the for sale section was edited by us (but it wasn't) so yes, it would seem random

The editing titles bit in the terms of use has been there for 12 years

For clarity I don't think my PM to Admin was me telling Admin ,but me expressing my opinion about someone else's thread


"Well it's always going to be a matter of opinion but my point is that the thread was to my mind - and who knows as it was Sue who wrote it - about Thames Water ."


Personally I think the thread should stay in the main section - it may be commenting on Thames Water's performance ( generically )but it is also commenting on that performance in East Dulwich specifically and how it affects residents there .


But I'm not actually a fan of splitting hairs about threads qualifying for ED section or Lounge .

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

    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
    • I perceive the problem.simply as spending too much without first shoring up the economy.  If the government had reduced borrowing,  and as much as most hate the idea, reduced government deiartment spending (so called austerity) and not bowed to union pressures for pay rises, then encouraged businesses to grow, extra cash would have entered the coffers and at a later stage when the economy was in a stronger position rises in NI or taxes would have a lesser impact, but instead Reeves turned that on its head by increasing ni which has killed growth, increased prices and shimmied the economy.  What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???     
    • That petition is bananas.   If you want a youth centre there pay the landlord the same rent a Londis would and build it yourself or shut the f**k up to be honest. Wasting our MPs time with this trivial nonsense is appalling. If your kids are still out at 1am on a school night you've got bigger problems than vapes and booze and hot sausage rolls. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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