Jump to content

Recommended Posts

the money shop on Rye Lane is becoming a delinquent centre. I for one am not happy about this as my son has been a victim of mugging to which on one occasion ended up in hospital with a broken arm so bad he needed surgery.

I know these centres need to be somewhere and I get they are trying to help reoffenders to stay out of trouble, however I don?t think this is the right area to do this. I see secondary school kids from schools in the area causing trouble as it is I don?t want more trouble to be attracted to my door step.

I feel for you, but there?s literally nowhere where residents nearby will welcome such a facility with open arms.

It (they) has to be located somewhere. What area we hold you consider the ?right area? ?

Is there going to be a consultation with locals where your concerns can be properly heard ? If not perhaps organise one.

I?m surprised it?s on a retail high st though, I?d expect rents to be high there.

I totally get these centres have to placed somewhere and nobody will welcome them, I just think these programmes should be within court areas- like probation type facilities. There is a probation centre within camberwell court, wouldn?t these types of programmes be better within that type of environment instead of right next to a betting shop and Tesco.
As a Probation officer myself, working with young people who are involved in crime, using the term 'delinquent' is not very helpful. You will find people involved in crime will not usually target people or properties right next to where they are getting support. At a guess, we have many people who offend in our community and we are none the wiser.

It wasn?t a word I used myself, it was a word that was used to describe what the shop was going to be by the construction workers.

Yes it is nice to have a support unit in place to stop crime being committed further, but being a mother of a child that was put in hospital due to being mugged I also know that it doesn?t matter what support you give SOME people they just go to these places because it was part of their punishment not because it was a choice of their own. The same boy who put my son in hospital is still round my area causing trouble after 6 months of visiting a detention centre. I know this doesn?t apply to every offender but I believe they wouldn?t all chose to commit to this support voluntarily

How come there have been 12 posts and the term NIMBY hasn't been mentioned yet? Maybe you should welcome this as part of Johnson reuniting society.


PS they have offenders in Dulwich Park with the orange community payback outfits on. I saw dog walkers, various boot camp exercisers, parents with young children etc etc and didn's see any mass panic.

From your last post, it sounds like it isn't so much the location that's bothering you, it's the concept of rehabilitation in general.


I'm sure many of them don't take it seriously. And if my kid had been hospitalised by some young thug, then I'd probably want the key thrown away too. But neither of these things mean that offender rehabilitation is not important...

It is more likely to be a service center for low level offenders to support them into a more constructive direction. Rye Lane is a retail area and these low level offenders probably already go there, for shopping if nothing else. So let me be the one to go there. Stop being a NIMBY Lcoe2. Think this through in a sensible way.


Edited to add, nothing on either the planning OR licensing registers. Given the existing licenses are for retail space, there is nothing as yet that indicates any change of use.

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> It is more likely to be a service center for low

> level offenders to support them into a more

> constructive direction. Rye Lane is a retail area

> and these low level offenders probably already go

> there, for shopping if nothing else. So let me be

> the one to go there. Stop being a NIMBY Lcoe2.

> Think this through in a sensible way.

>

> Edited to add, nothing on either the planning OR

> licensing registers. Given the existing licenses

> are for retail space, there is nothing as yet that

> indicates any change of use.


I live directly above it so not a retail area - there's 100s of us directly above and more across the street both ways - I'm a bit bad tempered when it comes to delinquents if they start and not the person they would want above them.


It's already been passed 19/AP/5796

Springer Wrote:

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

> It?s rye lane ffs were do you suggest they go ?

> It?s inner city London we live in not the

> cotswolds , maybe you should move if you feel

> unsafe



If they're quiet no issues


Like I said if they have mental issues here is not a good place for them - the area is not peaceful and tends to aggravate those with already emotional responses.


Edit: It's being set-up by Hillingdon - Boris's constituency so no doubt didn't want these people there.

Springer Wrote:

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

> It?s a wind up by the builders obviously


Well it's a joke that will rebound on them if it was. It is to be some kind of health center which I was OK with but I'd sort of forgotten about it - now I haven't. If it's been moved from Uxbridge due to political reasons I'll make them feel really welcome here.

> Like I said if they have mental issues here is not

> a good place for them - the area is not peaceful

> and tends to aggravate those with already

> emotional responses.


Hahaha, yes maybe we should have mental health checkpoints for people entering residential or shopping locations.


Oh dear, I really thought we had turned the corner on the mental health stigma problem, sad to see some of the comments here :(

sjsl Wrote:

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

> > Like I said if they have mental issues here is

> not

> > a good place for them - the area is not

> peaceful

> > and tends to aggravate those with already

> > emotional responses.

>

> Hahaha, yes maybe we should have mental health

> checkpoints for people entering residential or

> shopping locations.

>

> Oh dear, I really thought we had turned the corner

> on the mental health stigma problem, sad to see

> some of the comments here :(


Well they should have been open about it. It was supposed to be a Health Center - the shops are meant to supplement our social living as agreed with L&Q - they are for us at Co-Op House not general shops.


I argue enough with the students leaving the snooker hall at 4AM and that has just quietened off.

https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/new-mental-health-drop-in-centre-for-young-people-coming-to-peckham-in-may/


Here we go - I don't see how this benefits the residents above as was promised me by Tower Homes 10 years ago. Are they part subsidising my huge rent portion.


I'll find out.

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

    • Callout for help from any local experts here. Looking to find out more about the history of the property on the corner of Whateley Road and Ulverscroft road (with the green glazed bricks). Now a residential property, i'm told it was a bottle shop in days gone (the house was built around 1900) by and i'd like to learn more about the history of the business that was once here - name, photos, anything at all really! Seems to be very little from open source research so i'm hoping anyone with history in the area can provide any insight!  Starting here before i contact Southwark Archives or similar orgs to get any information and pictures (any advice here also would be welcome). Thank you
    • Portable ramps are available for businesses to use in this sort of situation, aren't they? I don't know whether one would be suitable for use here, or whether they have the space to store one. Lots of people have  permanent or temporary disabilities which mean they have to use crutches or a wheelchair.
    • I can’t remember where I read that figure but this article in the Grauniad from 2023 discusses Ocado results from 2022. The average shopping cart fell to £118 from £129 the previous year. But Ocado lost £500m that year on approximately 20 million orders (circa 400k orders per week). So, averaging out to £25 lost per order. Ocado pauses building new warehouses as annual losses balloon to £500m | Ocado | The Guardian  Obviously, the £500m loss includes various factors. But Ocado has existed for 25 years and only made a small profit in a couple of those years. The rest have been huge losses. Yet it continues to raise funds and speculation sends the share price up and down. In that respect,  it’s like the UK version of Tesla. Meanwhile, the main growth in the supermarket sector has been for Aldi and Lidl, who do not deliver.
    • download-file.mp4  Is this the sort of thing you are after?   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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