Jump to content

Recommended Posts

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> You said he would need an address to get benefits

> or money. I pointed out that he would not.


I said...


He would need money. ??? Would need an address to get benefits. ???


There are Question Marks.


I Don't know anything about claiming benifits.


Was simply asking Would he need money. ??? Would he need an address to get benifits ???.


Sorry for the shorthand. Too used to twitter where you only get 140 chars.


Fox.

I perosnally hope he becomes a permanent feauture if that is what he wants - will pop down and give him a food parcel at the weekend - we despartely need more eccentrics.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/29/haroonsiddique


And lets hope the council treats this with sensitivity it deserves http://www.expressandstar.com/latest/2007/11/02/rats-move-into-freds-old-home/

  • 2 weeks later...

I manage Sydenham Hill Wood on behalf of London Wildlife Trust.

My attention was brought to this thread and I felt I should repond to some of your questions.


This is the third year in a row that the man you refer to in this thread has been sleeping in Sydenham Hill Wood. Although we would not encourage people to camp in the wood we have no intention of asking him to move on. The man, and where he camps, is known to Southwark's Spot at St Mungos and it is my understanding that he chooses to sleep in the wood.


I can confirm that there has been a sad incident in the wood, but to my knowledge this is unrelated to the man camping. I cannot provide any more information on this and ask if people can please respect this persons privacy and allow the police to do their job.


Although one parcel of woodland Sydenham Hill and Dulwich Woods are under different management. London Wildlife Trust manages Sydenham Hill Wood, which is a nature reserve, and the Dulwich Estate manages Dulwich Wood, which is a private wood. There are maps at the entrances to Sydenham Hill Wood and the boundary between the two is marked by green posts. To complicate things Beechgrove, the section of the wood seen from Sydenham Hill with chain fencing, missing fencing and a brick wall, is not part of Sydenham Hill Wood or managed by London Wildlife Trust, but managed by the Dulwich Estate.


So in answer to the-e-dealer:

Two of the trees that have come down on Sydenham Hill in recent years have been from Beechgrove and one from Sydenham Hill Wood during the recent high winds(although this only blocked the pavement for a matter of hours). The Council are responsible for major treeworks in Sydenham Hill Wood (but not Beechgrove or Dulwich Wood). I advised them the next morning and they cleared it the same afternoon. Please understand that whilst trees are regularly inspected for safety they will come down from time to time. If trees fall within the wood, as long as they are not blocking any main paths or causing hazards, it is our policy to leave them where they fall.


Best wishes,


(Ms)Ashley White

Conservation Projects Officer

London Wildlife Trust

[email protected]

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

    • Post much better this Xmas.  Sue posted about whether they send Xmas cards; how good the post is,  is relevant.  Think I will continue to stay off Instagram!
    • These have reduced over the years, are "perfect" lives Round Robins being replaced by "perfect" lives Instagram posts where we see all year round how people portray their perfect lives ?    The point of this thread is that for the last few years, due to issues at the mail offices, we had delays to post over Christmas. Not really been flagged as an issue this year but I am still betting on the odd card, posted well before Christmas, arriving late January. 
    • Two subjects here.  Xmas cards,  We receive and send less of them.  One reason is that the cost of postage - although interestingly not as much as I thought say compared to 10 years ago (a little more than inflation).  Fun fact when inflation was double digits in the 70s cost of postage almost doubled in one year.  Postage is not a good indication of general inflation fluctuating a fair bit.  The huge rise in international postage that for a 20g Christmas card to Europe (no longer a 20g price, now have to do up to 100g), or a cheapskate 10g card to the 'States (again have to go up to the 100g price) , both around a quid in 2015, and now has more than doubled in real terms.  Cards exchanged with the US last year were arriving in the New Year.  Funnily enough they came much quicker this year.  So all my cards abroad were by email this year. The other reason we send less cards is that it was once a good opportunity to keep in touch with news.  I still personalise many cards with a news and for some a letter, and am a bit grumpy when I get a single line back,  Or worse a round robin about their perfect lives and families.  But most of us now communicate I expect primarily by WhatApp, email, FB etc.  No need for lightweight airmail envelope and paper in one.    The other subject is the mail as a whole. Privitisation appears to have done it no favours and the opening up of competition with restrictions on competing for parcel post with the new entrants.  Clearly unless you do special delivery there is a good chance that first class will not be delivered in a day as was expected in the past.   Should we have kept a public owned service subsidised by the tax payer?  You could also question how much lead on innovation was lost following the hiving off of the national telecommunications and mail network.
    • Why have I got a feeling there was also a connection with the beehive in Brixton on that road next to the gym
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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