Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Got initially helpful directions from a man in Nunhead this morning who then went onto say he was a member of the local Neighbourhood Watch and could he come back to my house and discuss safety issues.

Am I wrong in thinking this was a bit odd? If anyone knows how Neighbourhood Watch works, I'd be interested to hear.

Well it does not work like that!

Remember his face height weight age hair colour, skin colour etc and and try and describe him if you can come to the police safer neighbourhood team tomorrow at Brenchley Gardens Tenants and Residents Association Hall.

When we were young we'd walk past a building site. Hey mister, what are you doing? I'm building my own home. Great, can we have a look? Certainly. Each day after school. And then I passed with my mother one day and she thanked the home builder for entertaining young school children. And do you know what he showed us each day?


His days building work. Obviously in this day and age he would have provided us with hard hats and a quick safety talk. Or not approached us in any case due to the risk of misreporting.


Shame we have to be so suspicious. You never know it may be someone genuine - depending on your instincts (and your level of vulnerability) you could ask for more details and say that it wouldn't have been right to invite him round at this stage. Perhaps even talk to the local neighbourhood watch - if he is a genuine do-gooder some feedback from others on approach wouldn't do any harm. And if it is dodgy then SNT.

Trust your suspicions, that?s someone being a creep. Best case, lonely soul wants a cup of tea and a chat, and you?ll never be rid of him. ?Safety issues? is a line that could maybe lead to all sorts of things, perhaps including checking over your house with you and making security recommendations, while seeing for himself which window you leave unlocked and whatnot. Do encourage the local fuzz to have a word, if they can figure out who he is.

Lynne Wrote:

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

> Got initially helpful directions from a man in

> Nunhead this morning who then went onto say he was

> a member of the local Neighbourhood Watch and

> could he come back to my house and discuss safety

> issues.



Sounds like the adult version of come back to my place and see my little kittens (or puppies).


Totally bizarre behaviour.

Lynne, this was raised at the aforementioned appallingly attended Police Safer Neighbourhood Meeting this evening and they said it had been dealt with. It was otherwise an interesting meeting, as usual. Such a shame the community do not attend these important local meetings.

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 coop of Forest Hill Road is very different- cheerful and helpful staff 
    • Would you expose your young people to 'that man'? That is apparently a real question. 'That man' is in fact a retired Oxford Professor of Moral & Pastoral Theology who wrote a book setting out to provide a moral reckoning on the vexed subject of Britain's Empire and its history. What might formerly have been a purely academic matter has become highly contentious, and according to one Cambridge academic "serious shit" that needed to be CLOSED DOWN. It's all rather amazing, the stuff of satire or nightmare but not of the real world. Anyway, Lord Biggar accepted an invitation to visit Peckham and speak to and with a small audience that was due to include young Black students ... who in the end didn't come on the day! Having set the whole thing up to facilitate this encounter for them, the outcome was a disappointment. The conversation with Lord Biggar and audience was not:   
    • Entertaining a visitor from Philippines, she's been here before but I've promised lunch.  Somewhere a little different maybe, quirky?
    • Surely a very simple: "how much does the council receive from the organisers of the Gala festival for payment for use of Peckham Rye" would smoke out a response. The "commercial sensitivity" could be because the council are giving it away or it could be because Gala don't want others to know how much they are paying - it is really tough to make money from any type of festival these days and Wide Awake in Brockwell, for example, sent out a plea for people to buy tickets via a reduced price "Tell a Friend" special offer because (they said much of it linked to the problems Lambeth were having with the High Court) things were entering "squeaky bum time"  and they were struggling to hit their break-even point. It does make me wonder whether expansion is baked-in to the agreements the council has with the organisers for events like Gala as the organisers have to be able to scale the size of the event each year to try to make money. I do also how much of the "revenue" from these events might be swallowed up by the provision of the "free community" event element of them. The comment piece in the Guardian sums it up quite nicely: The heart of this issue seems to be how cash-strapped councils are becoming increasingly beholden to commercial interests to the detriment of the public. A weekend festival that welcomes 50,000 people can expect to raise about £500,000 for local authorities. Councils argue that this money goes back in the public purse, allowing them to continue funding free community events such as Lambeth’s beloved Country Show, though there doesn’t seem to be much transparency over exactly how much cash is raised or where it is allocated.   The issue for councils may well be that if people found out how much was actually being raised by these events that the community would say the disruption is not worth it and I do wonder how much of the revenue is being swallowed up by the provision of the "free event" using the same infrastructure. Any time a council doesn't want to share something openly very much suggests that it is because they think constituents won't like the answer.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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