Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My poor dog went in to a complete tizz because the fireworks disturbed him so badly - I bet I'm not alone in that. It is only about three weeks ago we had another late display which was at Alleyn's School. Was this one at the College? Anyone know? It is time these organisations actually warned residents so they can prepare for the noise and so we can be with our terrified animals.
I am towards the bottom of Underhill SE22 and I could see them from my sitting room window. It looked as if they were near/behind the church with the steeple on Lordship Lane near the bottom of Underhill (opposite the Concrete House)- can't remember its name. Sounded like the Blitz. Quite large fireworks.

FriendsOfTheTerrapin Wrote:

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

> I think you?ll find that the culprit was Dulwich

> and Sydenham Hill Golf Club 125th Anniversary

> Dinner and Fireworks night...


Ah, that would fit in with behind the church. I feel for the horses at the stables as well.


They looked more professional than domestic fireworks.

I think more broadly its yet again a question of appropriateness and judgement. The sound in this area carries horribly - we heard them up by East Dulwich Station so it definitely wasn't just a very local issue - they woke up one of my kids.


I don't believe that fireworks at 10-10:30 are appropriate in a residential area. Its dark by 8 these days so a 9pm curfew on fireworks would seem reasonable. Event planners need to realise they're not Disneyland - so fireworks arent' your 'go home' messsage!

As someone has already pointed out, if there was fireworks being let off at 10:30pm then there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. They are allowed to by law, and to expect people to not have fireworks just because you might upset some dog that might live nearby is unreasonable. Ill be letting plenty off this autumn and do not expect anyone to complain, or theyll be told the law as well as my opinions on the matter.


Also i consider comparing some fireworks to the Blitz in poor taste, especially when they would be nowhere near the same.

I think there is a difference between 'not illegal' or 'nothing stopping them' vs what is appropriate and responsible. There are lots of things we could all do legally that would make the lives of people living around us much less pleasant.


Coming off the back of the Alleyn's 400th anniversary celebrations fireworks (also ridiculously late and going on for a long time) these additional late fireworks haven't been well received and a little consideration from people planning events would be good.

You can actually get less noisy fireworks. It's just inconsiderate to be so loud and not care how it will affect people.


People expect fireworks at certain times of the year - otherwise, in a community, they should be advertised so people can take appropriate measures. Like staying in - or keeping the cats in.


It's not hard and to be honest, they would have thought about it and decided it didn't' matter/ wasn't worth the trouble.

Hemingway Wrote:

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

> I heard them, they were noisy, they lasted all of

> 10 minutes or so. Seriously what is wrong with

> people go and live in the middle of the country if

> you can't stand a few fireworks at 10.30pm on a

> Saturday.



Ridiculous isnt it. Some people shouldnt live in London at all if they are going to get annoyed at some fireworks on the weekend.

I would imagine it was advertised somewhere.


How far should they be leafleting? It's just impractical to expect an organisation to leaflet every house within a - say 2 mile - radius.


It was 10 minutes of fireworks at 10pmish on a Saturday night - I really think people just love to complain about things. And if you must - there are far worse things we could be complaining about.


Stop being so Grinchy.


Some people live in war-zones where there are load explosions going on at all hours - that might actually kill them.

The poster who started this thread was not being "grinchy" he or she stated the impact that 10 minutes had on his dog. Those affects can be long term you know. All it takes is 10 minutes out of the blue and bingo you have a long lasting and potentially serious problem. Firework noises are of a different order to everyday city sounds...please don't simply dismiss the effects of something when you may not fully appreciate the consequencea.
I would actually argue that maybe if fireworks apparently 'upset' their dog, then they shouldnt have a dog. Its not particularly kind keeping a dog indoors within a big city anyway- it would have a happier life in the countryside and wouldnt have to listen to other peoples fireworks.

Fireworks are actually really frightening for dogs and can make them behave in unpredictable ways, which can be unsafe and dangerous for them.


Owners need to be able to prepare and plan and be there when they start - which is usually at expected times.


It's thoughtless in a community to not care about other people and the effects this has on them.


No one is being boring - just practical and concerned.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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