Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Delightful lady had her dog shit against the tree outside the greeting card shop, then crossed Lordship Lane over to the health shop before walking up to the betting shop for (presumably) her partner.

If you know the lady please tell her I picked up her dogs poo for her and put it in the bin.

Perhaps also tell her that doggy bags are really really cheap, in fact she could probably get them free from the council, should she ever be minded to actually pick up after her dog has fouled on the main pavement in East Dulwich. Where is it


[Photos removed on request - Admin]

It would be great if that was the case, wouldn?t it.

However as I walked past the lady with my dog and waved doggy bags to make it clear I had some available she didn?t seem interested enough to subscribe.

I know, perhaps she was shortsighted and/or doesn?t like talking to strangers ?!

I think you did well. I've had to speak to a lady in GG park recently - it's just not good enough. It's a basic responsibility of owning a dog - as well as living in a community.


Maybe naming nad shaming is the way to go - and shouting after people.....

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> Delightful lady had her dog shit against the tree

> outside the greeting card shop, then crossed

> Lordship Lane over to the health shop before

> walking up to the betting shop for (presumably)

> her partner.

> If you know the lady please tell her I picked up

> her dogs poo for her and put it in the bin.

> Perhaps also tell her that doggy bags are really

> really cheap, in fact she could probably get them

> free from the council, should she ever be minded

> to actually pick up after her dog has fouled on

> the main pavement in East Dulwich. Where is it


Do not want to be the devil's advocate here as I strongly condemn dog fouling but you can be exposed to legal liability for posting pictures of her without her consent... just saying!

SBPy Wrote:

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


> Do not want to be the devil's advocate here as I

> strongly condemn dog fouling but you can be

> exposed to legal liability for posting pictures of

> her without her consent... just saying!


Please you explain why? She's in a public place

The Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The purpose of the Act was to create a criminal offence if a dog defecates at any time on designated land and a person who is in charge of the dog at that time fails to remove the faeces from the land forthwith.


Under those orders, a person who doesn't clean up after their dog may face an on-the-spot fine of up to ?80. These fines are known as fixed penalty notices. If a person refuses to pay they can be taken to the local Magistrates Court for the dog fouling offence and fined up to ?1,000.

Mscrawthew Wrote:

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

> Is there any reason you couldn't of asked her at

> the time?


I wuoldn't approach her...she is anti-social not picking up- I doubt if speaking to her would achieve anything except the obvious.

That Act was repealed. Dog fouling now covered by Cleaner Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 and one to do with anti social behaviour and policing 2014 ( sorry cannot recall full name). In a nutshell, dealing with fouling is down to local councils under existing Dog Control Orders or new PCSOs. Goose Green is a under a PCSO as is Peckham Rye, so the legislation is there and wardens etc.. can issue FPNs of ?100 or if it goes to court ?1000 fine.


Not sure how streets are covered. Perhaps under the 2014 Act but not sure. TBH the legislation has always been there for fines to be issued by Council Officers.

Mark Wrote:

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

> SBPy Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> > Do not want to be the devil's advocate here as

> I

> > strongly condemn dog fouling but you can be

> > exposed to legal liability for posting pictures

> of

> > her without her consent... just saying!

>

> Please you explain why? She's in a public place


It?s not against the law to take a photograph of a person in public, assuming they don?t have a reasonable expectation of privacy and your actions don?t harass, alarm or distress them. However, it?s what happens to the photo after it?s taken that could have wider implications. Think of someone taking pictures of children in a park and posting them online, or scammers using images of strangers to set up fake dating and social media profile.. There is the issue of online harassment which can happen if a picture goes viral and the subject is identified...

  • 2 weeks later...

KID KRUGGER


Iam the victim That you are trying to expose! I am horrified you would sink to new lows to shame people! yes that fine, you can make an allegation against me but make sure you have any proof (if any) I do not recall walking past the card shop and allowing the dog to foul! Do u have photographic evidence of this? if not then it is not your place to put my picture online without my permission, you should go to the council, this is seen as dafamation of character AND HARESMENT IF YOU ARE ASKING THE MEMBERS OF PUBLIC TO GO VIRAL! This behaviour has caused me great distress! In you post, you have presumed quite a lot about me and my character, which I am very offended and I will seek advice about you posting my picture. DO you have the actual evidence of the dog pooing? that's what you should post to shame me, not a picture of me walking by!


Ive noticed from all you posts you go round complaining or critising and now dafamation of character. which is totally unacceptable.


Is that why you call yourself kidkrugger? does the name say it all. I'm glad you called me delightful, I wish I could say the same about you!


I hope you realise the extent of the damage that you cause by your behaviour!, I'm sure you have no conscience when it comes to doing the right thing or wrong thing in your case!


Are you working for the authorities? if not, them its not your place to put pictures up with out permission!, I suggest you take it down. you've been incredibily unpleasant, at least if I make a statement, I make a fact statement.


I will seek advice

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

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

> Are they ever, if you're not on the beach?

> The urban equivalent is Sliders

>

> These are the gucci ones

>

> https://www.gucci.com/uk/en_gb/pr/men/shoes-for-me

> n/sandals-and-slides-for-men/web-slide-sandal-p-42

> 9469GIB109079?lgw_code=9565-807189669&ranMID=37933

> &ranEAID=gcdL%2FATRVoE&ranSiteID=gcdL_ATRVoE-a.LVc

> yPPy351JVo1OegSnQ&utm_source=Linkshare_UK&utm_medi

> um=affiliates&utm_campaign=1&utm_content=10&utm_te

> rm=2523611&siteID=gcdL_ATRVoE-a.LVcyPPy351JVo1OegS

> nQ&PublisherSID=2523611&PubName=Lyst+UK%2FEU


Wow! Anyone spending ?180 on Gucci Sliders needs to have a word with themselves

lucy123 Wrote:

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

> I am the victim That you are trying to expose! I

> am horrified you would sink to new lows to shame

> people! yes that fine, you can make an allegation

> against me but make sure you have the proof (if

> any) I do not recall walking past the card shop

> and allowing the dog to foul! Do u have

> photographic evidence of this? if not then it is

> not your place to put my picture online without my

> permission, you should go to the council, this is

> seen as defimation of character. In you post, you

> have presumed quite a lot about me and my

> character, which I am very offended and I will

> seek advice about you posting my picture. if you

> have the actual evidence of the dog pooing, that's

> what you should post to shame me, not a picture of

> me walking by!

>

> Ive noticed from all you posts you go round

> complaining or critising and now defimation of

> character. which is totally unacceptable.

>

> Is that why you call yourself kidkrugger? does the

> name say it all. I'm glad you called me

> delightful, I wish I could say the same about you!

>

>

> I hope you realise the extent of damage that you

> cause by your behaviour, I'm sure you have no

> conscience when it comes to doing the right thing!

>

>

> Are you working for the authorities? if not, them

> its not your place to put pictures up with out

> permission!, I suggest you take it down. you've

> been incredibily unpleasant, at least if I make a

> statement, I make a fact statement.


So are you saying that you do pick up after your dog, or that there is no evidence that you don't?


Must admit, I think the posting of photos / public shaming is a bit much.

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

    • Eh? That wasn't "my quote"! If you look at your post above,it is clearly a quote by Rockets! None of us have any  idea what a Corbyn led government during Covid would have been like. But do you seriously think it would have been worse than Johnson's self-serving performance? What you say about the swing of seats away from Labour in 2019 is true. But you have missed my point completely. The fact that Labour under Corbyn got more than ten million votes does not mean that Corbyn was "unelectable", does it? The present electoral system is bonkers, which is why a change is apparently on the cards. Anyway, it is pointless discussing this, because we are going round in circles. As for McCluskey, whatever the truth of that report, I can't see what it has to do with Corbyn?
    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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