Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

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

> Come on Jessie, What you got? A house on the

> market you can't shift?



Nope. just a girl, looking at East Dulwich, and saying what I am hearing. I am happy here in Dulwich and understand why everyone else wants to be here. Loving the banter though. You should be happy. Your value of your flat is going up by the minute... come on!

Give it time Jessie....you'll find as much pretentiousness and nonsense here as anywhere...people are people wherever you go I'm afraid. Btw....your surname is not Wallace is it? A move form Walford to ED I could definitely understand :))

JessieW Wrote:

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

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ok.

> > Housing.

> >

> > Where are there ANY houses the size or granduer

> of

> > the average house in Notting Hill? Most of them

> > (SE22) would fit in the halls of Notting Hill

> > properties...

>

>

> Majority of Notting hill property is small flats?

> honestly. Even the big houses don?t have a garden

> that can compare to most here. Believe me. For a

> one bed flat there, you get a 3 bed house here

> with a garden. Those are the types moving over.

> The young couples. Not the peeps with the mansions

> in Holland Park. Notting Hill is mainly 1-2 bed

> flats, well at least anywhere around Portobello

> Road


That's very true actually. The flats are absolutely tiny. But then I think you've got to be a bit into your postcode as status if you're mad enough to pay the prices over there for such ridiculously small properties

If you want a large flat with a large garden, free parking outside, next door to the park, within walking distance of Honor Oak Park station and the East London line, 12 mins to London Bridge, not much longer now to North London and easy access to the West End with a 2 minute walk away to a really good Italian restaurant, good fish and chip shop, good cafe and pub come up to Marmora Road, still got the Se22 postcode. I do have a flat to sell!

Anywhere 5 mins walking distance to Lordship Lane is bullet proof price wise more like the little Kings Road of the South.


Only problem is the small housing stock all little Victorian cottages when compared to the large Victorian Villas and Mansions of North London Clapham Brixton etc.


The area to aspire to is Dulwich Village, many move to E D with a view to hopping up to the Village when they get the big bonus of win the lottery.


Prices in East Dulwich and the Village are still below similar areas of North and West London because there are no International schools to attract Americans, Japanese or other Foreigners. I?ve friends who are stuck in Hampstead for the Japanese School who would love to move here.


I keep thinking of moving but when I compare prices in comparable areas is still 25% more expensive sq ft location for similar location and further from the city and central london, I?ve had plenty of time to look between contracts.


Peckham could do with a major reworking as it drags down this part of London terribly, maybe there?s more of an opportunity for a comparison with Notting Hill there only some of the estates would need to be leveled first.

Come to Marmora Road, SE22 Fazer, still walking distance to Lordship Lane, the houses that have not been converted to flats are large and imposing with grand staircases and large gardens, the houses that have been made into flats,the flats are still large and spacious. My flat is high spec, spacious with gardens front and back and for sale if anyone is interested?

fazer71 Wrote:

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

> Peckham could do with a major reworking as it

> drags down this part of London terribly, maybe

> there?s more of an opportunity for a comparison

> with Notting Hill there only some of the estates

> would need to be leveled first.


Funnily enough, a friend of mine says that the vibrancy of Peckham reminds him of Notting Hill in the 60's and 70's, pre-gentrification. For the sake of the communities who call it home, I hope it stays that way!

fazer71 Wrote:

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

> Peckham could do with a major reworking as it

> drags down this part of London terribly, maybe

> there?s more of an opportunity for a comparison

> with Notting Hill there only some of the estates

> would need to be leveled first.


Totally agree. A major improvement to Peckham (and the Elephant) would have a huge knock on effect to the wider SE area. They are the two big centres for this part of London and both have seen better days. It's a shame that the E&C regeneration has gone so far off course.

fazer71 Wrote:

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


> Peckham could do with a major reworking as it

> drags down this part of London terribly, maybe

> there?s more of an opportunity for a comparison

> with Notting Hill there only some of the estates

> would need to be leveled first.


Peckham has already had one of the largest regeneration schemes in Europe:

http://www.countryside-properties-corporate.com/peckham-partnership-additonal-information


It's one of the reasons SE15 house prices rose faster than most of the rest of London in the last decade.

I think you're being a little bit insensitive JessieW.


You're not likely to endear yourself to hard working unpretentious local residents if you announce yourself to be part of a (currently unpopular) 'foreign' tribe of smug advertising hacks, who are sweeping into the area with a view to changing it to make it more like an area that has a reputation for vacuous trustafarian tossers.


You then compound the problem by boasting about the money you're going make out of house prices - a rather unattractive and shallow trait that went out of fashion about the same the country collapsed into recession due to the idiocy of housing speculators.


Surely even someone in advertising could see that? ;-)


BTW, I am an advertising hack.

Fazer71 - I remember north peckham in the 1990s and frankly it's unrecognisable now. Every year another corner gets redeveloped with sensibly designed housing and civic space. If the internal quality of the homes matches the external, I think it will mature into an attractive place to live, just live the area between Surrey Quays and the river.
I second that Mike. The redevelopment of the estates of North Peckham over the past two decades has been a success. And personally I'd hate to live in an area that mirrors ED for miles around. One of the great things about this area of South London is it's diversity and there are just as many decent people living in Peckham as there are in ED....and in many cases far more interesting perhaps. To judge an area as being superior simply because it commands better house prices is also ridiculous and says more about the person making such a judgement than the area itself.

mikeb Wrote:

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

> Fazer71 - I remember north peckham in the 1990s

> and frankly it's unrecognisable now. Every year

> another corner gets redeveloped with sensibly

> designed housing and civic space. If the internal

> quality of the homes matches the external, I think

> it will mature into an attractive place to live,

> just live the area between Surrey Quays and the

> river.


It's certainly a lot better, but whether it stays nice now that the prop of public spending has been taken away is another matter. It's the kind of area that can be hit hard in a recession and start to deteriorate again. A lot depends on the local demographic. If the slums were cleared but the inhabitants all stayed, though in nicer buildings, then it may only be a matter of time before it feels like a slum again. Personally, I think proximity to the City will ultimately rescue Peckham, but the regeneration money has given it a helpful kickstart.

but whether it stays nice now that the prop of public spending has been taken away is another matter. It's the kind of area that can be hit hard in a recession and start to deteriorate again. A lot depends on the local demographic. If the slums were cleared but the inhabitants all stayed, though in nicer buildings, then it may only be a matter of time before it feels like a slum again.


But you are making a huge assupmtion there about the people who live in North Peckham (and if I were one of them might feel offended by that comment). Sure there will be some who take no pride in where they live. But the same can be said for ED. The local authoirity will continue with services such as bulk refuse collection even in times of recession, so there is no real evidence to think any area will degenerate into a slum. You might also perhaps like to take a look at Southwark Council's latest tenancy agreement too, where you'll see ample rules on what is expected from a tenant to ensure that where they live stays pleasant. The decent homes programme is still very much part of Southwark's agenda, so the programme of new windows and other essential mechanical engineering is set to continue. And the regeneration of the Aylesbury estate is also going ahead inspite of the recent economic crisis.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> but whether it stays nice now that the prop of

> public spending has been taken away is another

> matter. It's the kind of area that can be hit hard

> in a recession and start to deteriorate again. A

> lot depends on the local demographic. If the slums

> were cleared but the inhabitants all stayed,

> though in nicer buildings, then it may only be a

> matter of time before it feels like a slum again.

>

> But you are making a huge assupmtion there about

> the people who live in North Peckham (and if I

> were one of them might feel offended by that

> comment). Sure there will be some who take no

> pride in where they live. But the same can be said

> for ED. The local authoirity will continue with

> services such as bulk refuse collection even in

> times of recession, so there is no real evidence

> to think any area will degenerate into a slum. You

> might also perhaps like to take a look at

> Southwark Council's latest tenancy agreement too,

> where you'll see ample rules on what is expected

> from a tenant to ensure that where they live stays

> pleasant. The decent homes programme is still very

> much part of Southwark's agenda, so the programme

> of new windows and other essential mechanical

> engineering is set to continue. And the

> regeneration of the Aylesbury estate is also going

> ahead inspite of the recent economic crisis.


There's a big difference in the social make-up of East Dulwich and North Peckham. East Dulwich has a much higher rate of employment and almost none of the sink estates that scare away the middle classes and hold back gentrification. Crime is related to poverty and employment level - if Peckham remains an area with very high unemployment, its social problems are unlikely to disappear. I don't think changing the buildings that people live in is necessarily enough. There's a historical precedent for this situation. In the 1930s and 40s, following the stockmarket crash and depression, there were widespread slum clearances in the UK. Rows of decrepit Victorian terraces were pulled down and replaced with shiny new modern houses. Fast forward to today - the remaining Victorian workers' houses are now fashionable, whereas the interwar houses are not. Similar pattern in the 70s, with slum-dwellers rehoused in high-rise blocks that were considered excitingly modern at the time and are now being pulled down in places like Walworth and North Peckham. If regeneration consists only of changing the buildings and not the local economy, it doesn't have a lasting effect.

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

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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