Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well said Tiddles, I totally agree.


tiddles Wrote:

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

> I am amazed that our local councillors are

> presiding over a project that has caused so much

> anger, divided communities , damaged local small

> businesses after a really awful time abs to cap it

> all - caused horrific increases in pollution to

> the majority of our community. There are a number

> of streets that house very wealthy people - wide

> streets, large front gardens, but key routes that

> are now very quiet. I know several businesses and

> residents in the shut off streets of DV - business

> has dropped, and the residents hate being trapped.

> There is no allowance for care workers or social

> care.

> If anyone can tell me this is all fine then I am

> flummoxed. I have contacted councillors and it?s

> like dealing with a programmed robot.

@DulwichCentral

So you seem to accept that your original quotation was out-of-date misleading. Thank you.


By all means lets have a discussion but please stop makig alarmist, irrelevant or, as in the case of many claims from OSUtwark and our local Councillors, frankly incoprrect claims.

tiddles Wrote:

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

> I am amazed that our local councillors are

> presiding over a project that has caused so much

> anger, divided communities , damaged local small

> businesses after a really awful time abs to cap it

> all - caused horrific increases in pollution to

> the majority of our community. There are a number

> of streets that house very wealthy people - wide

> streets, large front gardens, but key routes that

> are now very quiet. I know several businesses and

> residents in the shut off streets of DV - business

> has dropped, and the residents hate being trapped.

> There is no allowance for care workers or social

> care.

> If anyone can tell me this is all fine then I am

> flummoxed. I have contacted councillors and it?s

> like dealing with a programmed robot.


They are automatons doing as they are told. Like many others who have drunk the Kool Aid, they have cars.

I believe the consultation on the Dulwich road measures has been mentioned on here but if you need details it is open until 11 July https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/dulwich-review/


I may have missed this on a post on this thread, and if so apologies, but as I walked along East Dulwich Grove today I had a thought that a one way system might work for the Council and for those using the roads. Although I live in the area and walk down Melbourne Grove every week I?ve not driven down it for years - since the footway parking was removed.

Elsie Road could stay closed off - this is used by children to access the primary school. Derwent Grove and Melbourne Grove could be reopened and made one way in opposite directions. This would halve traffic on each of these roads, reduce traffic on East Dulwich Grove and provide access to businesses / parking. The older children should have / need to develop road sense.


We live in London and its never going to be traffic free. The status quo doesn?t work. Closing streets to traffic, with timed restrictions or planters, doesn?t work for all locations.

The council is organising some meetings to discuss the closures - the first is this Sunday.




Council meetings on the closures: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/dulwich-streetspace-review-community-meetings-tickets-153435899907


Community Meetings to discuss the Highways schemes in Dulwich

About this event

We want to hear from as many people as possible in the local community - what are your views on the current Highways measures in Dulwich Village, East Dulwich and Champion Hill, and what would you like to see in the future?


We have scheduled 3 online meetings during the consultation period:-


1. Sunday 23rd May - the council will discuss the highways schemes, our aims and objectives.


2. Wednesday 26th May - we want to hear the views of the public and different stakeholder groups.


3. Saturday 19th June - we will break into smaller groups and look at the issues and challenges in greater detail - so everyone should get a chance to speak.


Please register your interest here and provide your email address - the link to the meeting will be sent out on the day and will come from [email protected] (please check your Junk folder)

alice Wrote:

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

> One way Melbourne towards Kings would allow

> ambulances to avoid Lordship Lane. Excellent idea.



When are people going to understand? Cars are much more important then emergency vehicles, so if a barrier is open to ambulances then we must allow cars too. We cannot allow the idea of making a barrier permeable to emergency vehicles.

Does anyone know why in 99% of other places the LTN barriers have been made permeable for emergency services yet in Dulwich Village they persist with immovable barriers - what is the rationale behind that - they made the Melbourne Grove barriers permeable?


Is it because the grand plans for the "Square" would not be possible if the emergency services need to have access?

Does anyone know why in 99% of other places the LTN barriers have been made permeable for emergency services yet in Dulwich Village they persist with immovable barriers - what is the rationale behind that - they made the Melbourne Grove barriers permeable?


Options include:

emergency services haven't asked for it / recommended it to date

insufficient funding for the ANPR equipment and installation at the moment

there's some kind of review / consultation that needs to present its findings before they commit to anything

it's on the to-do list but not yet got a work date

they have more permanent plans for "The Square" which means that ANPR installation now would be a waste of time


You can probably find out from the council or from LAS / LFB if emergency services have provided any feedback, recommendations, advice etc on that particular location.

answering your options:

- they have asked

- 2.5million available from penalty fines

- as they were installed during covid emergency wihout consultation they can be now removed without consulation.

- hard to believe - its a couple of hours work.

- depends who you mean by 'they'

Hubby had to take a taxi from town yesterday as all bus routes he needed to go on were not going south of the river (he could not find any notices/people to ask where they had been redirected to) Chatting to the taxi driver, Croxted Road was mentioned - it would appear that many taxi drivers will not take fares if they have to use this route as delays are up to an hour some days.

alice Wrote:

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

> The best way to make a barrier permeable is to

> remove it.

>

> Anything else wastes time.


Exactly! We both agree that cars are more important than emergency vehicles. If the cars have to waste time sitting in traffic then like you, I demand that emergency vehicles should too. There must be no special access to low traffic roads for ambulances. If they can use roads, I can too.





heartblock Wrote:

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

> The infamous square will... if it stays, make it a

> no through for cyclists in case little Chlamydia

> or Epididymis is knocked over by a Lycra clad king

> of the road.


Those Lycra Clad Kings of the road are just plain evil. I can't stand the way they have the temerity to get in the way of my motor vehicle on my roads! I will never give them the time of day, and yet I can feel them judging me, always judging judging judging. We should stop at nothing to rid ourselves of them. Plus they're massively and I might add unfairly skewing the results of the LTN consultations by being in favour of them. I think if we could remove them from the process we could get a majority of support for removing LTNs.

Pugwash Wrote:

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

> Hubby had to take a taxi from town yesterday as

> all bus routes he needed to go on were not going

> south of the river (he could not find any

> notices/people to ask where they had been

> redirected to) Chatting to the taxi driver,

> Croxted Road was mentioned - it would appear that

> many taxi drivers will not take fares if they have

> to use this route as delays are up to an hour some

> days.


Uhm, most drivers are desperate for work - some black cabs are queueing at heathrow 12-18 hours for a fare. They get paid whether moving or not.

So, is it true as reported, that in Sept 2020 the London Ambulance Service reported delays to life threatening emergencies and asked for Southwark Council to remove the hard closures in Calton, Derwent and Melbourne? Citing traffic jams on Grove, EDG and Croxted and no alternative routes.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> So, is it true as reported, that in Sept 2020 the

> London Ambulance Service reported delays to life

> threatening emergencies and asked for Southwark

> Council to remove the hard closures in Calton,

> Derwent and Melbourne? Citing traffic jams on

> Grove, EDG and Croxted and no alternative routes.



I'm wondering if you as a One Dulwicher could help me out here? You see I broke my principles and actually talked to one of those lycra clad kings of the road. A bit of a sin I know but all that lycra just really got me going, you know? I know you know! That lycra gets you going too as you have commented. Anyway I didn't enjoy the conversation because he had a point I wasn't really able to counter and I was wondering if you could help so I can win the argument next time.


You see he said that if the closures remained but were accessible to emergency vehicles in an emergency then not only could emergency vehicles use the routes, but they'd be guaranteed to be almost completely car free, thereby allowing swift passage. He then pointed out that as we get rid of more and more cars, life will get easier and easier for emergency vehicles.


This got me angrier than a timed closure when I want to pop quickly to the shops. Like you and Alice, I know in my heart that it is right that cars should be able to use those routes, especially if ambulances can, but I just didn't have the words. Every time I argued about ambulances he said closed routes with ambulance gates would be faster because no cars would be in the way. This cannot be right!


Help me out here, what should i say next time?

Well, so far, this has not been contradicted, so I guess we can conclude it is true.


heartblock Wrote:

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

> So, is it true as reported, that in Sept 2020 the

> London Ambulance Service reported delays to life

> threatening emergencies and asked for Southwark

> Council to remove the hard closures in Calton,

> Derwent and Melbourne? Citing traffic jams on

> Grove, EDG and Croxted and no alternative routes.

first mate Wrote:

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

> Well, so far, this has not been contradicted, so I

> guess we can conclude it is true.


If lycra clad road kings can't contradict an uncited post within 12 hours at night it is clear to me and every anti LTN activist that they must agree with it. Therefore I declare your analysis to be correct.


This is what we must do if we want to win on LTNs. We must do all we can to rule out input from the lycra clad kings of the road. After all we both know their opinions don't count so we must make sure they are not counted. That is the only fair and equitable thing to do.

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 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.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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