Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am sick & tired of the P13 bus-stops in Underhill Road being repeatably closed, and I?m not the only one, judging by the following message posted on one of these bus stops :?The ***holes have done it again!'.

This time it is due to a burst water-main, and I can?t help but wonder if Thames Water damaged this water-main themselves when carrying out the works that closed Underhill Road last week!


I also note that TFL no longer put the ?Bus Stop Closed? notice on the flag,so that even disabled and elderly people have to take, what to them, could be a long walk to find out the bus-stop is closed.


Is it really worth having a P13 bus route serving Underhill Road nwhen P13 users are constantly persecuted in this way?

What the Hell have we done to make Thames Water, TFL etc dislike us so much! Indeed ? is it really worth living in Dulwich?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/221156-p13-bus-route-underhill-road/
Share on other sites

I agree! This has to be the 6th or 7th time that the P13 (which I rely upon daily) is on diversion.


And yes! They've given up even announcing it, or signposting it. The last three days, I've had to wait up to 30 minutes (in the rain with two young kids) for the bus. It's maddening.


I am also at my wit's end!

The diverted route is Underhill till Barry road, right to onto Barry road, Left onto Lordship Lane, then returns to ususal route, right at the Grove Tavern.


As others have said it's an absolute inconvenience, especially for coming back from DKH. Why can't they just allocate more workman to do all the works in one go when it is closed or actually plan the works.

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

    • From the BBC: "The conclusion of that deliberation is that we accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologise for that error of judgement." What is wrong is editing someone to make him say something they didn't.  With respect Sephiroth, this is something I know a bit about and I have encountered, over the last decade, people in programming editing contributors to make them say things they didn't, the end point being to hang them out to dry. It's happening more and more and it's my job to make sure that people on TV are not mis-represented, but shown in their true light so that viewers can make up their own minds. You have no idea what goes on behind the scenes and how hard some us fight to keep things impartial.  It's also worth mentioning that I have personally lost work because of Trump suing US networks, and that's one of the lesser reasons why I'd like to see him gone.  But broadcasters have a moral obligation to tell the truth and that's the hill that most decent professionals in the industry are willing to die on. Otherwise, how can the viewing public trust anything that's beamed into their living rooms? 
    • Amazing work from Leon, doing out electrical survey and replacing our consumer board. Great communications, tidy work, reliable friendly and reasonably priced. A pleasure to have around and highly recommended. 
    • Counterpoint: there was zero misrepresentation of truth    never mind the bbc or the uk (for now)-  his own country and government impeached him for trying to overturn an election.  What happened was unforgivable. Trump adding a few “non violent”’ legally wise words absolves him of nothing  but back to bbc and uk.  They were correct and now we have Trump threatening to sue for a billion have English people lost all self-respect (that question was answers 9 years ago and is repeated almost daily) 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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